
Glass .^' V, , 

Book VI si 2- 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY 

OF WHEAT ^^ 



BY 



T: L: LYON 



Thesis presented to the University Faculty of Cornell University 
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 



1904 



Also printed as Bulletin No. 78, Bureau of Plant hidustry, 
U. S. Department of Agriculture 



Cornell TJuiv. Lib. BxohangP 






^c" 






r-. \ 



PREFACE. 

I wish to express my appreciation of the guidance of Professor 
I. P. Roberts, Professor G. C. Caldwell and Professor Thomas 
F. Hunt, who constituted the committee having my work in 
charge, also of the advice given by Dean L,. H. Bailey and the 
assistance of Mr. G. N. Lauman. For the analytical work, 
extending through a period of seven years and involving several 
thousand chemical determinations, I am indebted to Professor S. 
Avery, Mi. R. S. Hiltner, Professor R. W. Thacher, Mr. Y. 
Nikaido, Miss Rachael Corr, Mr. H. B. Slade and Mr. G. H. 
Walker. Mr. Alvin Keyser has kept records of the wheat 
breeding plats and Mr. E. G. Montgomery has assisted in 
keeping other records. 



CONTENTS 



Page. 

Object of the investigation 13 

Part I. — Historical: 

Some conditions affecting the composition and yield of wheat 17 

Composition as affected by time of cutting 17 

Influence of immature seed upon yield 20 

Influence of climate upon composition and yield 20 

Influence of soil upon composition and yield 23 

Influence of soil moisture upon composition and yield 29 

Influence of size or weight of the seed-wheat kernel upon the crop yield... 30 

Relation of size of kernel to nitrogen content 35 

Influence of the specific gravity of the seed kernel upon yield 37 

Relation of specific gravity of kernel to nitrogen content 39 

Conditions affecting the production of nitrogen in the grain 40 

Part II. — Experimental: 

Some properties of the wheat kernel 49 

Yield of nitrogen per acre '2 

Method for selection to increase the quantity of proteids in the kernel 76 

A basis for selection to increase the quantity of proteids in the endosperm of 

the kernel 8"! 

Improvement in the quality of the gluten - 91 

Some results of breeding to increase the content of proteid nitrogen 95 

Yield of g; ain as affected by susceptibility to cold - 100 

Yield and nitrogen content of grain as affected by length of growing period. . 104 

Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant Ill 

Summary and conclusions 11° 

9 



TABLES OF EXPERIMENTS. 



Table 1 . Analyses of kernels of high and of low specific gravity 49 

2. Proportion of light and of heavy seed 50 

3. Analyses of large, heavy kernels and of small, light kernels 50 

4. Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of 

kernels. Crop of 1902 52 

5. Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen 

content of kernels. Crop of 1902 56 

6. Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to specific 

gravities of kernels. Crop of 1902 56 

7. Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to weight of 

average kernel. Crop of 1902 .57 

8. Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen. 

Crop of 1903 59 

9. Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of pro- 

teid nitrogen. Crop of 1903 64 

10. Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average kernel. Crop 

of 1903 65 

11. Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average 

kernel. Crop of 1903 71 

12. Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to grams of proteid 

nitrogen in average kernel. Crop of 1903 72 

13. Crops grown from light and from heavy seed for four years 73 

14. Analyses of twenty-five spikes of wheat, showing their total organic nitro- 

gen : 77 

15. Analyses of twenty-three spikes of wheat, showing their percentage of 

proteid nitrogen _ 77 

16. Analyses of twenty-one plants, showing total nitrogen and proteid nitro- 

gen 78 

17. Analyses of spikes of wheat, showing difference in proteid nitrogen 79 

18. Variations in content of proteids 80 

19. Relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid nitrogen 85 

20. Summary of analyses, showing relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen 

to proteid nitrogen 88 

21. Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen 88 

22. Summary of analyses, showing relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus- 

glutenin nitrogen 91 

23. Ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of their sum increases 92 

24. Summary of analyses, showing the ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the con- 

tent of their sum increases 94 

25. Analyses showing transmission of nitrogen from one generation to 

another 96 

11 



12 TABLES OF EXPEKIMENTS. 



Table 26. Summary of analyses, showing transmission of nitrogen from one genera- 
tion to another 98 

27. Analyses showing transmission of proteid nitrogen in average kernel 99 

28. Analyses showing transmission of kernel weight 100 

29. Yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family. , 101 

30. Summary of yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in 

each family 104 

31. Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of 

growing period 105 

32. Summary of yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according 

to length of growing period Ill 

33. Summary of nitrogen content, etc., tabulated according to yield per 

plant Ill 

34. Summary of yield, etc., tabulated according to nitrogen content Ill 

35. Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant 112 

36. Summary of relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant . 118 

37. Relation of yield of plant to height and tillering, and to the yield per head . 118 

38. Relation of yield per head to yield, height, and tillering of plant, and to 

weight of average kernel 118 



B. P. I.-158. V. P. P. I.-133. 

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



OBJECT OF THE INVESTIGATION. 

Efforts to improve the wheat plant have been numerous and have 
accomplished important results. The work of Fultz, Clawson, 
Rudy, Wellman, Powers, Hayne, Bolton, Cobb, Green, and Hays in 
improving by selection, and of Pringle, Blount, Schindel, Saunders, 
Farrar, Jones, Carleton, and Hays in improving by hybridization, 
has resulted in giving this country many prolific strains and varieties 
of wheat, while Garton Brothers, of England, Farrar, of New South 
Wales, Vilmorin, of France, Rimpau, of Germany, and others have 
accomplished the same for other portions of the world. Attempts 
at improvement have, however, been directed primarily tow^ard effect- 
ing an increase in the yield rather than in the equality of the crop. 
While the latter property has not been entirely lost sight of, selection 
based on quality has never been applied to the individual plant, but 
only to the progeny of otherwise desirable plants. 

Why selection for quality of grain in the individual plant has not 
gone hand in hand with, selection for other desirable properties is 
perhaps to be explained by the fact that no method for such selection 
has ever been devised. Mr. W. Farrar, of Queanbeyen, New South 
Wales, in an address made a short time ago, said: 

Before we can make any considerable progress in improving the quality of the grain of 
the wheat plant we shall have to devise a method for making a fairly correct quantitative 
estimate of the constituents * * * of the grain of a single plant and yet have seeds 
left to propagate from that plant. 

In devising a method for increasing the percentage of nitrogen in 
wheat it becomes desirable to know the causes that produce variation 
in this constituent of the kernel. Numerous experiments and obser- 
vations have been made on this subject, the results of which agree in 
the main in attributing such variation to the following conditions : 

(1) Stage of development of the kernel. 

(2) Variation in temperature of different regions. 

(3) Variation in temperature of different years in the same region. 

(4) Variation in the supply and form of soil nitrogen. 

(5) Variation in the supply of soil moisture. 

13 



14 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

All of these factors have been studied, and are recognized as opera- 
tive. Nothing, however, appears to have been done to show their 
influence upon the actual amount of nitrogen taken up by the wheat 
plant and deposited in the kernel. This is really the point of greatest 
interest; for although it is desirable to secure a wheat of greater nutri- 
tive value, it should not be done at the sacrifice of yield of nitrogenous 
substance. 

Admitting that variation in the nitrogen content of wheat is 
induced by the conditions mentioned, it is essential to the plant 
breeder to know whether a high or low nitrogen content may be, 
under similar conditions, a characteristic of an individual plant; 
whether this quality is transmitted to the offspring; with what con- 
stant characteristics it is correlated, and whether a high percentage 
of nitrogen in a normal, perfectly matured wheat plant is an indica- 
tion of a large accumulation of nitrogen by that plant. 

The data contained in this paper cover the points mentioned, and 
it is hoped that some definite information has been gained that will 
lead to a practical solution of the problem of improving by breeding 
the quality of wheat for bread making. 



Fj!^Tirn I 



HISTORICAL 



15 



SOME CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE COMPOSE 
TION AND YIELD OF WHEAT. 



Experiments to ascertain the effect of different conditions upon 
the composition and yield of wheat have been conducted mainly 
along the following lines: 

(1) Stage of growth at which the grain is harvested. 

(2) Influence of immature seed upon the resulting crop. 

(3) Effect of chmate. 

(4) Effect of soil. 

(5) Effect of soil moisture. 

(6) Influence of size or weight of seed upon the resulting crop. 

(7) Influence of specific gravit}^ of seed upon the resulting crop. 

A brief summary of a number of these experiments is herewith 
given. 

COMPOSITION AS AFFECTED BY TIME OF CUTTING. 

In 1879/' and again in 1892/^ Dr. R. C. Kedzie conducted very 
careful experiments to note the chemical changes that occur in the 
wheat kernel during its formation and ripening. These agree in 
the main in showing a gradual decrease in the percentage of total 
nitrogen, albuminoid nitrogen, and non-albuminoid nitrogen from 
the time the grain set to the time the kernel was ripe. The decrease 
in all of these constituents was much more rapid during the first 
than during the last stages of this development. The percentage 
of ash decreased at the same time. 

In 1897 Prof. G. L. Teller'' carried on some experiments in which 
he covered the ground already gone over by Doctor Kedzie and 
also contributed to the knowledge of the subject some very important 
data concerning the proportion of the various proteids contained 
in the wheat kernel during the process of development. Teller 
found that the proportion of total nitrogen in the dry matter steadily 
decreased from the time the kernel was formed up to about a week 
before ripening, but that, unlike Doctor Kedzie's results, it gradually 
increased from that time on. He intimates , that this increase before 
ripening may have been due to defective sampling and hoped to 

a Report of Michigan Board of Agriculture, 1881-82, pp. 233-239. 

''Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 101. 
'■ Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 53. 

27889— No. 78—05 2 17 



18 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



repeat the experiment to remedy this, but he has pubHshed nothing 
further. Tlie amid nitrogen continued to decrease up to the time of 
ripening, as did also the ash, fats, fiber, dextrins, and pentosans. 
There was a gradual and marked increase in the proportion of ghadin 
up to the time of ripening, and a somewhat less and rather irregular 
decrease in the proportion of glutenin during the same period. 

Failyer and Willard " report analyses of wheat in the soft-dough 
stage and when ripe. The ash, crude fiber, fat, and the total and 
albuminoid nitrogen were higher in the soft-dough wheat, and the 
nitrogen-free extract and non-albuminoid nitrogen were higher in 
the ripe wheat. 

Dietrich and Konig -' quote results from five experimenters — Reiset, 
Stockhardt, Heinrich, Nowacki, and Handtke. Only in one case 
(Heinrich) is there a constant decrease in total nitrogen as the grain 
approaches ripeness. There is much inconstanc}^ in the results, there 
being in some cases a decrease, in nitrogen between the milk stage 
and full ripeness and sometimes an increase. There is little informa- 
tion to be gained from the results quoted b}" Dietrich and Konig. 

Kornicke and Werner in their "Handbuch des Getreidebaues "'^ 
refer to the work of Stockhardt, and also that of Heinrich, to show 
that during the process of ripening the percentage of nitrogen in 
the wheat kernel gradually diminishes, as does also the percentage 
of ash, and that, on the other hand, the percentage of carbohydrates 
increases during the same period. Heinrich also shows by a state- 
ment of the number of grams of these constituents in 2,600 kernels 
at different stages of development that the absolute amount of 
nitrogen and ash increases up to the time of ripening, and that 
consequently the decrease in the percentage of these constituents 
is due to the rapid increase in the carbohydrates. The results 
obtained by Heinrich appear as follows when tabulated: 



stage of growth. 



14 days after bloom 
Beginning to ripen. 

Ripe 

Overripe 



Starch. 



Percentage 
in 100 

parts of 
dry matter 

of kernel 



61.44 
74.17 
75.66 
76.38 



Grams in 

2,600 
kernels. 



22.0 
.58.5 
67.0 
70.0 



Protein. 



Percentage 
in 100 

parts of 
dry matter 

of kernel 



14.05 
12.21 
11.82 
11.67 



Grams in 

2,600 
kernels. 



5.0 
10.0 
10.5 
10.7 



Percentage 
in 100 

parts of 
dry matter 

of" kernel. 



Grams in 

2,600 
kernels. 



2.48 
2.14 
1.97 
1.88 



0.84 
1.70 
1.75 
1.79 



Nedokutschajew'' analyzed wheat kernels at different stages of 
development and found*an almost uniform decrease in the percentage 



(' Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 32. 
b Zusammensetzung u. Verdaulichkeit der Futterraittel, 1, p. 419. 
c Handbuch des Getreidebaues, Berlin, 1884, 2, pp. 474-476. 
rfLandw. Vers. Stat., 56 (1902), pp. 303-310. 



COMPOSITION" AS AFFECTED BY TIME OF CUTTING. 



19 



of total nitrogen, a slight but irregular decrease in the percentage of 
proteid nitrogen in tlie dry matter, and a constant decrease in the 
percentage of amid nitrogen. He holds that the amid substances 
are converted into albumen as the kernels ripen. His figures are 
as follows : 



Date. 



Weight 

of 
kernel 

(mg.). 



Percentage of- 



Dry I Total Proteid ^^^^' Amid 
matter, nitrogen, nitrogen.! uitrogen i^itrogen. 



Julv 13.. 
Julv 18. . 
July 24 . . 
July 29.. 
August 3 
August 9 



9.17 
15.80 
.30. 79 
37.99 
46.39 
45.46 



30.14 
37.23 
45.18 
38.37 
51.52 
49.83 



2.87 
2.55 
2.65 
2.46 
2.32 
2.37 



1.90 
1.94 
2.33 

2.08 
1.98 
2.13 



0.29 
.20 

.19 
.16 
.13 
.11 



0.68 
.41 
.13 

. 22 

i'ii 

.13 



Judging from these results there can be no doubt that the per- 
centage of nitrogen, both total and proteid, decreases as the kernel 
develops, ow^ng to the more rapid deposition of starch that goes 
on during the later stages of growth. The larger part of the nitrogen 
used by the wheat plant appears to be absorbed during the early 
life of the plant. This is transferred in large amounts to the kernel 
in the early stages of its development, after which nitrogen accretion 
by the kernel is comparatively slight. The deposition of starch, 
on the other hand, continues actively during the entire development 
of the kernel. It would further appear that the amid nitrogen is 
converted into proteid compounds as development proceeds. 

As showing the stages of growth of the wheat plant at which the 
greatest absorption of nitrogen occurs, some experiments may be 
quoted. 

Lawes and Gilbert" say: 

In 1884 we took samples of a growing wheat crop at different stages of its progress, 
commencing on June 21, and determind tb.e dry matter, ash, and nitrogen in them. Calcu- 
lation of the results showed that, while during little more than five weeks from June 21 
there was comparatively little increase in the amount of nitrogen accumulated over a given 
area, more than half the total carbon of the crop was accumulated during that period. 

Snyder's analyses'' show that of the total amount of nitrogen 
taken up by the wheat plant, 85.97 per cent is removed from the soil 
within fifty days after coming up, 88.6 per cent by time of heading 
out, and 95.4 per cent by the time the kernels are in the milk. 

Adorjan'' finds that assimilation of plant food from the soil is not 
proportional to the formation of dry matter in the plant, but that 
it proceeds more rapidly in the earl}^ stages of growth. During early 
growth nitrogen is the principal requirement. The nitrogen stored 

« On the Composition of the Ash of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 
b Minnesota Experiment Station Bulletin 29, pp. 1.52-160. 

'■ Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 14, p. 4.36, from Jour. Landw., .50 (1902), 
pp. 193-230. 



20 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

up at that time is, he says, used later for the development of the 
grain. 

It is too well known to require substantiation by experimental 
evidence that the yield of grain per acre and the weight of the indi- 
vidual kernel increase as the grain approaches ripeness. It is there- 
fore quite evident that immaturity, although resulting in a higher 
percentage of nitrogen in the wheat kernel, would curtail the pro- 
duction of nitrogen by the crop, and, furthermore, that the produc- 
tion of proteids would be still further lessened by reason of the 
greater proportion of amid substances present in the grain at that 
time. 

INFLUENCE OF IMMATURE SEED UPON YIELD. 

Georgeson " selected kernels from wheat plants that were fully ripe, 
and from plants cut while the grain was in the milk. He seeded these 
at the same rate on 2 one-tenth acre plots of land. The immature 
seed yielded at the rate of 19.75 bushels per acre of grain and 0.8 ton 
of straw, while the mature seed produced 22 bushels of grain and 
1.04 tons of straw per acre. Georgeson says that in a similar experi- 
ment the previous year the difference in favor of the mature seed 
was still more pronounced. 

Although the evidence is limited, it may safely be considered that 
the use of immature seed w^ill result in a smaller yield of wheat than 
if fully ripe seed be used. 

INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE UPON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 

Lawes and Gilbert* state that "high maturation in the wheat crop 
as indicated by the proportion of dressed corn in total corn, propor- 
tion of corn in total product (grain and straw), and heavy weight of 
grain per bushel, is, other things being equal, generally associated 
with a high percentage of dry substance and a low percentage of both 
mineral and nitrogenous constituents." This is based upon the 
wheat crops at Rothamsted for the years 1845 to 1854, inclusive. 

More recent publications' by these investigators reaffirm their 
belief that the composition of the wheat kernel depends more largely 
upon the conditions that affect its degree of development than upon 
any other factor. They found almost invariably that a season that 
favored a long and continuous growth of the plant after heading, 
residting in a large yield of grain, a high weight per bushel, and a 
plump kernel, produced a kernel of low nitrogen content. 

"Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 4, p. 407, from Kansas Experiment Station 
Bulletin 33, p. 50. 

^ On Some Points in the Composition of Wheat Grain, London, 1857. 

c Our Climate and Our Wheat Crops, London, 1880, and On the Composition of the Ash 
of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 



INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE UPON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 21 

Kornicke and Werner " cite an experiment in which winter wheat 
grown in Poppelsdorf for several years was sent to and grown in the 
moist chmate of Great Britain, in Germany, and in the continental 
climate of Russia (steppes) . The results were as follows : 





Number 
of exper- 
iments. 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Percentage of— 


Locality. 


100 
plants. 


Kernels 
from 100 
plants. 


Grain. 


Straw. 




37 
18 
19 


600 
500 
365 


227 
204 
160 


37.8 
40.8 
44.0 


62.3 




59.2 




56.0 











These investigators conclude from the results that in a moist cli- 
mate relatively more straw and less grain are produced than in a dry, 
warm climate. The thickness of the straw and the weight of the 
kernels from 100 heads are greater, while the percentage by weight 
of kernels to straw is much less in a moist climate. They also quote 
Haberlandt as saying that a continental climate produces a small, 
hard wdieat kernel, rich in gluten and of especially heavy weight. 

Deherain and Dupont * report some interesting observations as to 
the efTect of climate on the composition of wheat. They state that the 
harvest of 1888 at Grignon was late and the process of ripening slow. 
There was a heavy yield of grain having a gluten content of 12.60 per 
cent and a starch content of 77.2 per cent. The following season was 
dry and hot, with a rapid ripening of the grain, resulting in a smaller 
crop. The gluten content of the grain was 15.3 per cent and the 
starch content 61.9 per cent. They removed the heads from a num- 
ber of plants. The next day the stems were harvested, as were also 
an equal number of entire plants. The stems without heads showed 
that carbohydrates equal to 5.94 per cent of the dry matter had been 
formed. The stems on which the heads remained one day longer 
contained 1.63 per cent carbohydrates. They argue from this that 
the upper portion of the stem, provided it is still green, performs the 
functions of the leaves in other plants and thus elaborates the starch 
that fills out the kernel in its later development. 

A report from the Ploti Experiment Station ' states that the con- 
ditions that favored an increase in yield caused a reduction in the 
relative proportion of nitrogen in the grain. Excessive humidity 
favored the process of assimilation of carbohydrates, while drought 
hastened maturation and produced a grain relatively rich in proteids. 

« Handbuch des Getreidebaues, Berlin, 1884, pp. 69, 70. 
&Ann. Agron., 1902, p. .522. 

<-' Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 14, p. 340, from Sept. Rap An. Sta. Expt. 
Agron. Ploty, 1901, pp. xiv-180. 



22 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

Wiley" sent wheat of the same origin to Cahfornia, Kentucky, 
Maryland, and Missouri. The original grain and the product from 
each State were analyzed. The results of one year's test were 
reported. Regarding the effect of climate, he says: 

There appears to be a marked relation between the content of protein matter and starcli 
and the length of the growing season. The shorter the period of growth and the cooler the 
climate the larger the content of protein and the smaller the content of starch, and vice 
versa. 

Shindler/' in his book upon this subject, says (p. 75): 

With the length of the growing period, especially with the length of the interval between 
bloom and ripeness, varies not only the size of the kernel, but also the relative amount of 
carbohydrates and protein it contains. 

Again, on page 76, Shindler says: 

All this shows that the protein constituent of the kernel depends in the first place upon 
the length of the growing period and next upon the richness of the soil. 

Melikov ^ made analyses of different varieties of wheat of the crops 
of the years 1885-1899 grown in southern Russia. The protein 
varied in different years from 14 to 21.2 per cent. Melikov concludes 
that the nitrogen content is highest in dry years and lowest in years 
of larger rainfall, in which years the yield of wheat per acre is also 
greater. 

Gurney and Morris,'' in one of their reports, say: 

This increased gluten [over previous years] is probably largely due to differences in the 
seasons, the weather being hot and dry while the grain was ripening, since it is character- 
istic not of thpse wheats alone but of most of the grain grown in the colony. 

The conclusion to be inevitably derived from these observations 
is that climate is a potent factor in determining the yield and compo- 
sition of the wheat crop, and, further, that its effect is produced by 
lengthening or shortening the growing season, particulai'ly that por- 
tion of it during which the kernel is developing. A moderately cool 
season, with a liberal supply of moisture, has the effect of prolonging 
the period during wliich the kernel is developing, thus favoring its 
filling out with starch, the deposition of which is much greater at 
that time than is that of nitrogenous material. With this goes an 
increase in volume weight and an increased yield of grain per acre. 
On the other hand, a hot, dry season shortens the period of kernel 
development, curtails the deposition of starch, leaving the per- 

« Yearbook U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1901, pp. 299-308. 

'' Der Weizen in seinem Beziehungen zum Klima und das Gesetz der Korrelation, Berlin, 
1893. 

'Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 13 p. 451, from Zhur. Opuitn. Agron., 1 (1900), 
pp. 256-267. 

(I Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 12, pt. 2, pp. 140:3-1424. 



INFLUENCE OF SOIL UPON YIELD. 



23 



centage of nitrogen relatively higher, and gives a grain of lighter 
weight per bushel and smaller yield per acre. 

The fact that one variety of wheat is adapted to a hot, dry climate 
and another to a cool, moist one does not mean that the former under- 
goes as complete maturation as the latter, even though the grain is not 
shriveled. This is shown by the fact that a variety of wheat well 
adapted to a hot, dry climate will, when planted in a cool, moist one, 
immediately grow plumper and the kernel weight will increase, as 
was the case in the experiment of taking Minnesota wheats to Maine. 

INFLUENCE OF SOIL UPON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 

In considering the effect of the soil upon the wheat crop there will 
naturally be included experiments designed to show the effect of 
fertilizers upon the crops. It is, in fact, upon experiments with fer- 
tilizers that we must depend for most of our information on this 
subject. 

Experiments to ascertain the effect of fertilizers upon the composi- 
tion of the wheat kernel were conducted by Lawes and Gilbert for a 
period of years extending from 1845 to 1854." Plots of land in 
which wheat was grown continually were treated annually as follows : 
Unmanured, manured with ammoniacal fertilizer alone, and manured 
with ammoniacal fertilizer and proportionate amounts of mineral 
salts. In composition calculated to dry matter, the wheat on the 
plots receiving ammoniacal fertilizer alone contained quite uniformly 
a slightly larger amount of nitrogen than either of the other two. 
The averages for the ten years were as follows: 



Kind of fertilizer, if any. 


Percent 

Nitrogen 
in dry 
matter. 


age of— 

Ash in 

dry 
matter. 


Weight 

of grain 

per 

bushel 
(pounds). 


Percent- 
age of 
good 

kernels. 


Yield per 

acre 
(pounds). 




2.13 
2.26 
2.22 


2.07 
1.85 
1.96 


58. 51 
5S. 9 
60.2 


90.6 
90. .3 
92.8 


1,045 


Ammonium salts 

Minerals and ammonium salts 


1,668 
1,969 



There was practically no difference in the nitrogen content of the 
straw. From these experiments the authors quoted conclude that 
there is no evidence that the nitrogen content of the wheat kernel 
can be increased at pleasure by the use of nitrogenous manures. 

Ritthausen and Pott '^ report an experiment in which plots of land 
were manured (1) with superphosphate alone, (2) with nitrate alone, 
(3) with a mixture of superphosphate and nitrate, and (4) were left 

f On Some Points in the Composition of Wheat Grain, London, 1857. 
&Landw. Vers. Stat., 16 (1873), pp. 384-399. 



24 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



iinmanured. There were three plots of each. The followmg is a 
tahulated statement of their results : 



Kind of fertilizer, if any. 



Unfertilized 

Superphosphate 

Nitrate 

Superphosphate and nitrate 




' Yield of 
grain on 

plot 
(kilos) . 


Percentage 

of nitrogen 

in dry 

matter. 



2.72 
2.30 
2.03 



2.60 
3.49 
3.43 
3.62 



It will be noticed that the effect of the nitrate fertilizer was to 
decrease the yield of grain, but to increase the size of the kernel and 
its content of nitrogen. 

Wolff/' as early as 1856, in summing up the experiments of Hermb- 
stadt, Muller, and John with barley, and of Lawes and Gilbert with 
wheat, says: 

In the presence of a sufficient amount of phosphoric acid and alkaH the effect of manuring 
with an easily soluble nitrogen compound is an improvement in the grain both in quantity 
and cjuality [meaning plumper kernels]. The kernels decrease in percentage of nitrogen, 
but become plumper, become absolutely and relatively richer in starch, and have a better 
appearance and a higher commercial value. But when the nitrogenous food in the soil 
exceeds a certain relation to the temperature and rainfall the quality of the grain becomes 
poorer [harder], it becomes lighter and smaller, takes on a darker color, and generally 
becomes richer in percentage of nitrogen in the air-dry substance. 

VonGohren^ also reports results of experiments in fertilizing wheat. 
All experiments were apparently made in the same year. He grew 
the crop on six different plots of land, five of which were manured and 
each with a different fertilizer. In- the crop he distinguished between 
large kernels and small kernels to show the quality of the product. 
Determinations of proteids and starch were made, and these were 
calculated to the yield of each constituent on each plot. 

The following table shows the yield of each of the characters deter- 
mined, and compares those raised on the unmanured plot with those 
on the manured ones by taking the former as one and reducmg the 
others to the corresponding figure : 



Yield and percentage. 



Yield of grain 

Yield of large kernels . 
Yield of small kernels. 

Yield of proteids 

Yiell of starch 

Percentage of proteids 
Percentage of starch . . 



Unferti- 
lized. 



Ashes. 



1.000 
1.000 
1.000 
1.000 
1.000 
14.42 
62.67 



i.on 

.146 

.953 

.999 

1.009 

14. 2.5 

62.56 



Oil cake. 



Oil cake 
g— • I ashel 



Bat 



1.071 

1.92S 

.704 

.915 

1.081 

12.70 

63.25 



1.143 

2. .552 

.538 

.936 

1.174 

11.81 

64.41 



1.215 

2.226 

.781 

1.070 

1.264 

12.70 

65.24 



Peruvian 
guano. 



1.286 

2.786 

.642 

1.114 

1.303 

13. 22 

63.55 



The results show an increased yield from the use of fertihzers, the 
production increasing wdth the application of complete manures. 



« Die naturgesetzlichen Grundlagen des Ackerbauef , Leipzig, 1856, p. 774. 
fcLandw. Vers. Stat., 6 (1864), pp. 15-19. 



INB^LUENCE OF SOIL UPON YIELD. 



25 



The yield of grain of good quality increases in the same way, and the 
yield of grain of poor quality decreases proportionately. It must be 
remembered that by good quality of grain in these early writings is 
meant plump kernels and not necessarily what would be considered 
wheat of good milling quality at the present day. The production of 
proteids per acre decreased with the use of the incomplete fertilizers, 
ashes and oil cake, and even with the bat guano. It increased, how- 
ever, with the use of oil cake and ashes combined and of Peruvian 
guano. The percentage of proteids was greatest in the unfertilized 
grain and the percentage of starch least, with the exception of one 
fertilized plot. 

The very evident effect of the fertilizers in this case was to produce 
a more completely matured kernel. It will be noticed that the plots 
producing grain of highest starch content were those having the 
greatest proportion of plump kernels. 

Again, in 1884, Lawes and Gilbert" report results obtained from 
manured and unmanured soils. These experiments cover a period of 
sixteen years and are divided into two periods of eight years each. In 
one of these periods the seasons were favorable for wheat, in the other 
unfavorable. 



Character. 



Favorable seasons. 



Unfavorable seasons. 



Barnyard 
manure. 



Weight of grain per bushel 
(pounds) 62.6 

Percentage of grain to straw . : 62. 5 

Grain per acre (pounds) 2, 342. 

Straw per acre (pounds) 6,089.0 

Percentage of nitrogen in dry " 
matter 1. 7.3 

Percentage of ash in dry mat- 
ter 1.98 

Nitrogen per bushel (pounds) | 1. 083 



Un- 
manured. 



60.5 

67.4 

1,156.0 

2, 872. 

1.84 

1.96 
1. 113 



Ammo- 
nium salts 
alone. 



60.4 

66.2 

1,967.0 

4, 774. 

2.09 

1.74 
1.262 



Barnyard 


Un- 


manure. 


manured. 


57.4 


54.3 


.54.5 


51.1 


1,967.0 


823.0 


5, 574. 


2,4.33.0 


1.96 


1.98 


2.06 


2.08 


1.125 


1.075 



Ammo- 
nium salts 
alone. 



53. 7 

46.7 

1,147.0 

3,601.0 

2.25 

1.91 
1.208 



It is evident from this statement that the largest crops and best 
developed kernels were obtained from the soils treated with barnj^ard 
manure, and that these kernels contained the lowest percentage of 
nitrogen. The crops on unmanured soil stood next in these respects, 
except in Afield . Those on the soil receiving ammonium salts pro- 
duced the most poorly developed kernels and those of highest nitrogen 
content, but gave larger yields than the unmanured soil. 

In the unmanured soil there was a very evident lack of plant food, 
as indicated by the light crops. The effect upon the kernel was to 
curtail its development, leaving it of light weight and with a relatively 
high nitrogen content. 



« On the Composition of the Ash of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 



26 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Hermbstadt obtained some curious results, as quoted by D.G. F. 
MacDonald/' as follows: 

He sowed equal quantities of wheat upon the same ground and manured them with equal 
weights of the different manures set forth below. From 100 parts of each sample of grain 
produced he obtained starch and gluten in the following proportions: 



Kind of fertilizer, if any. 



Unfertilized 

Potato peels 

Cow dung 

Pigeon dung 

Horse dung 

Goat dung 

Sheep dung 

Dried night soil 

Dried ox blood 

Dried human urine. 



Gluten. 


Starch. 


9.2 


66.7 


9.6 


65.94 


12.0 


62.3 


12.2 


63.2 


1.3.7 


61.64 


.32.9 


42.4 


32.9 


42.8 


.33. 14 


41.44 


34.24 


41.43 


31.1 


39.3 



Produce. 



Threefold. 

Fivefold. 

Sevenfold. 

Ninefold. 

Tenfold. 

Twelvefold. 

Do. 
Fourteenfold. 

Do. 
Twelvefold. 



These results are not to be considered seriously, representing as 
they do an impossible condition. 

Prof. H. A. Huston^ treated 0.01-acre plots ^of land each with 
nitrate of soda, dried blood, sulphate of ammonia, rotted stable 
manure, and muck, respectively, either in the autumn or spring, or 
in both seasons. In 1891 all the plots treated with nitrogenous com- 
pounds showed marked increase in the percentage of nitrogen in the 
grain. In 1892 the results were by no means so uniform and would 
not justify the conclusion that nitrogenous fertilizers increased the 
nitrogen content of the wheat. 

Vignon and Couturier'" tested the effect of phosphate fertilizer 
alone upon the nitrogen content of the grain of two varieties of wheat. 
On Plot 1 the}^ used 75 kilograms of phosphoric acid per hectare; on 
Plot 2, 150 kilograms, and on Plot 3, 225 kilograms. 





Variety. 


Percentage of nitrogen in 
grain. 




Plot 1. 


Plot 2. 


Plot 3. 




1.83 
2.07 


1.61 

1.98 


1.54 


Riete 


1.82 











There was a very evident decrease in the nitrogen content of the 
crop as the quantity of fertilizer was increased. 

It was concluded from experiments conducted at the Ploti Experi- 
ment Station '^ that, with favorable meteorological conditions, manure 
increased the total amount of nitrogen taken up by wheat, but, 

« Practical Hints on Farming, London, 1868. 
^ Indiana Experiment Station Bulletins 41 and 45. 
^Compt. Rend., 132 (1901), p. 791. 

'/Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 14, p. 340, from Sept. Rap. An. Sta. Expt. 
Agron. Ploty, 1901, pp. xiv-180. 



INFLUENCE OF SOIL UPON YIELD. 



27 



although it thus increased the total production of nitrogen, it 
decreased the relative proportion of nitrogenous substance. 

Bogdau" conducted investigations the results of which indicated 
that with an increase in the soluble salt content of 22 alkali soils the 
nitrogen and ash contents of the wheat kernels increased, but the 
absolute weight of the kernels diminished. These soluble salts are 
rich in nitrates. 

Experiments were conducted by Whitson, Wells, and Vivian-' in 
which plants were grown in pots the soils of which were in some cases 
fertilized with nitrates and in others with leachings of single and 
of double strengths from fertile soils. Field experiments were con- 
ducted on manured and unmanured plots. All of the analyses, 
except in the case of oats, were of the whole plant. Of the ripe oat 
kernels those from the unfertilized soil contained 2.57 per cent of 
nitrogen, while the average of those from the fertilized soil was 2.78 
per cent. 

Guthi-ie*^ conducted experiments with fertilizers for wheat during 
two years, in which he kept a record of the yield and gluten content of 
the grain. The following is a statement of the results: 



KLad of fertilizer, if any. 



Experiments in 1901- 



At Wagga. 



At Bathurst. 



Yield 
per acre 
(bush- 
els). 



None 7.7 

Ammonium sulphate 8.7 

Superphosphate 13. 3 

Potassium sulphate 13.0 

Ammonium sulphate, superphosphate, 

potassium sulphate ' 10. 



Percent- 
age of 
gluten. 



11.99 
10.43 
12.06 
12.02 

11.70 



Yield 
per acre 
(bush- 
els). 



13 
16 

13.5 
13.0 

13.7 



Percent- 
age of 
gluten. 



11.80 
11; 21 
12.01 
11.29 

12.05 



Experiments in 
1902, at Wagga. 



^^®^^ i Percent- 
per acre i „„„ „J 

(bush- J ^^eof 

els). 



gluten. 



17.6 
17.6 
22.6 
19.2 

20.3 



9.8 



11.4 
10.0 



12.0 



In this experiment there was in each case a higher percentage of 
gluten in the wheat raised on the fertilized soil than in that from the 
soil fertilized with ammonium sulphate, and in the latter less than in 
the grain fertilized with other material. 

The most striking feature of these results is their apparent lack of 
uniformity. In some cases the use of nitrogenous fertilizers was 
accompanied by an increase in the nitrogen content of the grain and 
in other cases no increase appeared; in some cases phosphoric acid 
fertilizers apparently increased the nitrogen content and in others 
they did not have this effect. 

Climatic influences have doubtless operated largely in these results, 
but they are not considered by any of the experimenters except Wolff. 

^'Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 13, p. 329, from Report of Department of Agri- 
culture, St. Petersburg, 1900. 

'^ Wisconsin Experiment Station Report, 19 (1902), pp. 192-209. 

f Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 13 (1902), No. 6, p. 664; and No. 7, p. 728. 



28 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

It is evident that in all experiments with depleted soils the plants on 
the plots receiving complete fertilizers would take up larger amounts 
of plant food, including nitrogen, than would plants on immanured 
soils. Any conditions that would prevent the normal ripening of the 
crop on both soils would therefore leave a higher percentage of nitro- 
gen in the plants upon the unmanured soil. On the other hand, 
under conditions which would permit of a complete maturation of the 
crop there might be no difference in the composition of the grain from 
the manured and unmanured soils. It is evident, however, that the 
production of both nitrogen and starch in pounds per acre would be 
greater on the manured soils. 

Another condition that may affect the results is the arrested devel- 
opment of kernels on unmanured soils that are seiiously depleted of 
plant food. Such depletion may interfere with complete maturation 
of the crop while the crop on the manured soil will mature fully. In 
consequence the grain on the unmanured soil will contain a higher 
percentage of nitrogen but a smaller yield per acre. The use of a 
nitrogenous manure alone on exhausted soils may likewise result in 
•a grain of higher nitrogen content. 

Expressed in a more general way, this means that wheat of the 
same variety grown under the same climatic conditions will have 
approximately the same percentage of nitrogen if allowed to mature 
fully, l)ut any permanent interruption in the process of maturation 
will result in a higher percentage of nitrogen, and in the latter case the 
percentage of nitrogen will depend upon the stage at which develop- 
ment was interrupted, and also upon the amount of nitrogen accumu- 
lated by the plant, that being greater on soils manured with nitroge- 
nous fertilizers alone than on exhausted soils, and greater on soils 
receiving complete manures than on exhausted soils receiving only 
nitrogenous fertilizers, provided the stage at which development 
ceased be the same in both cases. It thus happens that wheat grow- 
ing on the soil allowing it to absorb the largest amount of nitrogen 
will, other things being equal, have a higher nitrogen content if the 
development of the kernel be permanently checked, although if it 
were allowed to mature fully it would not have a greater percentage 
of nitrogen than that grown on the soil affording less nitrogen. 

Reviewing the experiments, we find that in Lawes and Gilbert's 
first experiment the percentage of nitrogen in the unmanured soil was 
less than on the soil receiving only nitrogenous fertilizer, and that the 
weight of grain per bushel and the percentage of good kernels on the 
two plots were practically the same. It would not appear, therefore, 
that the wheat on the plot receiving the nitrogenous fertilizer was less 
w^ell matured than that on the unmanured plot. In this case there 
appears to be a slight increase in the percentage of nitrogen, due 
entirely to the use of nitrogenous fertilizers. Comparing the grain on 



INFLUENCE OF SOIL MOISTURE UPON YIELD, 



29 



the plot receiving only nitrogenous fertilizer with that receiving the 
complete fertilizer it will be seen that the former has a higher percent- 
age of nitrogen, but this is evidently due to the poorly developed ker- 
nels which weigh less per bushel than the grain on the completely 
fertilized plot. 

Yon Gohren's results show plainly that the kernels on the manured 
land developed better than on the unmanured, and with tliis better 
development there was an increase in the percentage of starch and a 
decrease in the nitrogen. 

In Lawes and Gilbert's second experiment the percentage of nitro- 
gen in the w^heat on the soil manured with ammonium salts was less 
than that in the wheat on the unmanured soil, but the weight of grain 
per bushel shows that the higher nitrogen content was due, in part at 
least, to incomplete maturation. The higher percentage of nitrogen 
in the wheat on the soil receiving only nitrogenous manures as com- 
pared with that receiving complete manures can be traced to the same 
condition of the grain. 

INFLUENCE OF SOIL MOISTURE L'PON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 

Experiments were conducted b}' D. Prianishinkov " in which wheat 
was raised with different degrees of moisture, but in the same soil and 
under the same conditions of light and temperature. With a larger 
amount of moisture in the soil there was a lower nitrogen content in 
the grain. It was also stated that the duration of the period of vege- 
tation was somewhat shorter when the moisture supply was greater. 

Traphagen'^ reports marked changes in the composition of wheat 
grown with and without irrigation at the Montana Experiment 
Station. A wheat grown under irrigation on the station farm was 
planted the following year on land not irrigated. Presumably the 
land was of similar character. The two crops of grain were analyzed 
and the percentages stated below were found. 



Crop. 



Mois- 
ture. 



Crude 
protein. 



Ether 
extract. 



Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 



Crude 
fiber. 



Irrigated wheat . . . 
Unirrigated wheat. 



Per ct. 

7.87 
7.65 



Per ct. 
8.81 
14.41 



Per ct. 
1.93 
2.23 



Per ct. 
76.99 
71.33 



Per ct. 
2.60 
2.65 



Por ct. 
1.80 
1.70 



No records of yields or of weights of kernels are given , but it is fair 
to suppose that the unirrigated wheat possessed the light, shrunken 
kernel which is characteristic of wheat raised without sufficient 
moisture. 



" Akstract, Experiment Station Record, 13, p. 631, from Zhur. Opuitn. Agron., 1 (1900), 
No. 1, pp. 13-20. 

^Montana Experiment Station Report (1902), pp. 59-60. 



30 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Irrigation experiments were conducted b}- Widtsoe ■' in which wheat 
of the same variety was raised on plots of land each one of which 
received a different quantity of water. A record was kept of the 
yield and composition of the grain on each plot. 



Plot. 


Water 
applied 
(inches). 


Yield 
per acre 
(bush- 
els). 


Percentage of— 


Yield ( in pounds) 
per acre of— 


Protein 
in grain. 


Ash in 
grain. 


Nitrogen. Ash. 


317 
319 
320 
318 
321 
325 
322 
326 
327 
328 
329 
330 


4.63 

5.14 

8.73 

8.89 

10.30 

12.09 

12.18 

12.80 

17.50 

21.11 

30.00 

40.00 


4.50 
3.83 
10.33 
11.33 
14.66 
11.16 
11.66 
13.00 
15.33 
17.33 
26.66 
14.50 


24.8 
23.2 
19.9 
19.4 
18.4 
21.3 
23.1 
17.1 
17.2 
15.9 
14.0 
17.1 


2.50 
3.07 
2.54 
2.93 
2.34 
3.25 
2.88 
2.52 
2.57 
2.34 
4.14 
2.52 


10.7 6.75 
8.5 7.05 

19.7 15.74 
21.1 ' 19.72 
25.9 20.24 

22.8 21.44 
25.8 20.30 
21.3 21.50 

25.3 23.64 

26.4 1 24.33 
35.8 I 66.20 
23.8 21.92 



The results show that w ith an increase in the water used for irriga- 
tion up to 30 inches there were in general an increase in the yield of 
grain and a decrease in the nitrogen content. No volume weights 
or other means of judging of the development of the kernels on the 
different plots are given, but there is no reason to suppose that the 
grain on the plots receiving small quantities of water was not poorly 
developed. The column added showing the jield of nitrogen in 
pounds per acre indicates a lack of nutriment in the grain on these 
plots.'' 

High nitrogen content arising from a small supply of soil moisture 
is sometimes due to a restricted development of the kernel. There 
is nothing in these results to indicate a greater absorption of nitrogen 
by the crop on soil having less moisture, but results of this nature 
are cited elsewhere in this bulletin. 



INFLUENCE OF SIZE OR WEIGHT OF THE SEED-W HEAT KERNEL UPON 

THE CROP YIELD. 

Sanborn ^ reports experiments to ascertain the effect of separating 
seed wheat into kernels of different grades to ascertain the effect upon 
the yield. He divided the kernels into large, medium, small, ordinary 
(grain as it came from the thrasher), and shriveled, and continued 
the experiments for four years. Apparently the large kernels were 
separated from the crop grown from large seed the previous year, and 

« Utah Experiment Station Bulletin 80. 

'' Nitrogen has been calculated from proteids by dividing by 6.25. 

c Utah Experiment Station Report, 1893, p. 168. 



INFLUENCE OF SIZE OR WEIGHT OF SEED KERNEL, 



31 



SO with the other classes of kernels. He tabulates his results as 
follows : 



Kind of seed. 


Yield of grain on plots (in ^J^l^P 
pounds). - }°^l^l 




1890. 


1891. 


1892. 1893. 


Bushels 
per acre. 




88.5 


72.5 
70.0 
105.0 
95.0 
43.0 


Ill 63.0 
87 67.0 
64 74.0 
87 29.5 
78 31.0 


18.72 




16.60 


Small -. 


94.6 
84.0 


18.72 




16.42 




11.25 









The relation between yields of the crops representing different 
sized kernels is so irregular from year to year that suspicion is 
aroused regarding the accuracy of the results, due to lack of uni- 
formity in soil. Sanborn's conclusion is that very little, if any, 
advantage is to be gained by separating seed wheat and planting 
the large kernels. 

At the Indiana Experiment Station, Latta" conducted experi- 
ments in which wheat was separated by means of a fanning mill into 
heavy and light kernels, but impurities and chaffy seed were fanned 
out of each lot of wheat. The experiments were continued three 
years, but the separations were made each year from seed that had 
not been so separated the year before. The average gain from the 
large seed for three years was 2.5 bushels per acre. 

Georgeson,* at the Kansas station, seeded plots of land with (1) 
light seed weighing 56 pounds per bushel, (2) common seed weighing 
62.5 pounds, (3) heav}" seed weighing 63 pounds, and (4) selected 
seed, obtained by picking the largest and finest heads in the field just 
before the crop was cut, weighing 61.5 pounds per bushel. Seed was 
separated each year from wheat not grown from previously selected 
seed. The average results for three years w^ere as follows: 



Grade of seed. 



Light 

Common. 



Yield of 
grain 

per acre 
(bush- 
els). 

25.19 
26.57 



Grade of seed. 



Heavy 

Select (average for 2 years) . 



Yield of 
grain 

per acre 
(bush- 
els). 



27.07 
25.82 



Desprez'" reports experiments extending through three years In 
which large kernels were selected from a crop grown from large seed 

« Indiana Experiment Station Bulletin 36, pp. 110-128. 
f> Kansas Experiment Station Bulletin 40, pp. 51-62. 

'Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 7, p. 679, from Jour. Agr. Prat., 59 (1895), 2, 
pp. 694-698. 



32 TMPE0VINC4 THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

for several years and small seed from a crop grown from small seed 
for several years. Five varieties of wheat were used. The average 
results for three years were a difference of 1,067 to 1,828 kilograms 
of grain per hectare in favor of the large seed, but the difference was 
in general greater the first year than later. The use of large seed 
gave a crop with kernels larger than those grown from small seed. 

]\liddleton" reports the yields obtained from large wheat kernels 
to be almost double those obtained from small seed kernels. 

Bolley, ^ as the results of experiments continuing for four years in 
which plump kernels of large size and plump kernels of small size 
were selected for seed, concludes that "perfect grains of large size 
and greatest weight produce better plants than perfect grains of 
small size and light weight, even when the grains come from the same 
head." 

At the Ontario Agricultural College. Zavitz'' selected large plump 
seed, small plump seed, and shrunken seed of both spring and winter 
wheat. Experiments were continued for eight years with spring 
wheat and five years with winter wheat, the selections each year 
being from a crop grown from previously unselected seed. His 
results are as follows: 

Yield per acre (in 
bushels). 
Kind of seed. 




Large, plump 

Small, plump , 

Shioinken 

Deherain and Dupont ■' report that the yields from small and large 
kernels of a numl^er of varieties of wheat were in all cases in favor of 
the large kernels, but a large diiference in yield was obtained only 
when there was a marked difference in the weight of the kernels. 

Soule and Vanatter'^ conducted experiments for three years in 
which large and small kernels were separated by means of sieves. 
In addition a plot of unselected seed was planted. The large seed 
was, each year after the first, selected from the crop grown from 
large seed the previous year. The same was true of the small seed. 
These investigators say: 

« Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 12, p. 441, from Univ. Coll. of Wales Kept., 
1899, pp. 68-70. 

''North Dakota Experiment Station Report, 1901, p. 30. 

'' Ontario Agricultural College and Experiment Farm Report, 1901, p. 84. 

''Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 15, p. 672, from Compt. Rend., 135 (1902), 
p. 6.54. 

'^ Tennessee Experiment Station Bulletin, vol. 16, No. 4, p. 77. 



INFLUENCE OF SIZE OK WEIGHT OF SEED KERNEL. 



33 



The average difference in yield at the end of three years between iai'ge grains (607 per 
ounce), commercial sample (689 per ounce), and small grains (882 per ounce), with Med- 
iterranean wheat, was 2.06 Inishels in favor of large grains as compared with the commercial 
sample, and 5.18 bushels in favor of large grains over small grains. The difference in yield 
l)etween the large grains and the commercial sample chiefly occurred the first year; but it 
is possible, though hardlv probable, that the difference was partly due to variation in the 
soil. The experiment has been carried on in different parts of the field for the last two 
j'ears, and the difference in yield is now only 0.32 bushel per acre in favor of the large grains. 

Cobb " reports tests of various grades of wheat kernels with respect 
to size, and conchides that large kernels give better yields of grain. 
The seed of one year was not the product of the corresponding grade 
of the previous one. 

GrenfelP selected plump and shriveled kernels from the same bulk 
of grain. Of these 150 kernels were sown in each row, with rows of 
plump and shriveled kernels alternating. The germination in both 
rows appeared much alike, but the plants in the rows sown from 
plump grain soon began to gain on the others and kept ahead for the 
remainder of the season. The tillering was better in the plump- 
grain plants. Grenfell tabulates his results thus: 



Variety. 



Kind. 



Stein vvedel Plump 

Do : Sliriveled . 

Purple Straw do 

Do Plump 

Do Sliriveled . 

Do Plump 

Do Shriveled . 



Plump-kernel averages 

■Shriveled-ke' nel averages . 



I Average 

'^TZntf ^ Number Tillering ' ^i^ld Per 
tha?gfew. °f5^e^ds.| power. ^^^Jl_ 
els). 



96.0 
89.3 
89.. 3 
90.0 
7B.0 
92.0 
98.0 



92.7 

88.5 



179 
174 
1.53 
200 
140 
161 
1.5.5 



180 
1.5.5 



1.24 
1.29 
1.14 
1.49 
1.16 
1.23 
1.34 



1.32 
1.23 



10.9 
9.9 
6.1 

10 
6.9 
8.4 
7.2 



9.8 



As bearing upon this subject some experiments conducted by 
Riinker'" are of interest. He weighed each of the kernels of a large 
number of heads of wheat of the Spalding Prolific and ^Martin Amber 
varieties, and found that the heaviest kernels occur in the lower half 
of the spike. With spikes of different lengths and weights, the 
weight of the average kernel increases with the size of the spike. 

Weights of individual kernels from the same spikes show that 
there is a great range in this respect. One spike, of which Ranker 
gives the weights of all the kernels, and which is given as representa- 
tive of the average, shows kernels varying in weight from 36 to 71 
milligrams. 

« Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 14 (1903), No. 2, pp. 14.5-169. 
«> Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 12 (1901), No. 9, pp. 1053-1062. 
e Jour. f. Landw., 38 (1890), p. 309. 

27889— No. 78—05 3 



34 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

It is therefore quite evident that a sample of wheat taken from 
spikes of different sizes when separated into lots of light and heavy 
kernels would have both the larger spikes and smaller spikes repre- 
sented in each lot of kernels, but doubtless the proportion of kernels 
from large heads would be greater in the lot of heavy kernels. 

It would appear from these results that the evidence was over- 
whelmingly in favor of large or heavy wheat kernels for seed. ]\Iost 
of the experimenters selected seed of different kinds each year without 
reference to previous selection. If large seed or small seed represent 
plants of different characteristics and if these properties are' hered- 
itary, the results of selection of large or small seeds for several 
years may be quite different from what they would be the first year. 
It is only those experiments in which selection of the same kind of 
seed has been continued for several generations that may be relied 
upon to indicate the value of continuous selection of large kernels 
for seed. 

Such experiments have been conducted by Sanborn, b}" Desprez, 
and by Soule and Vanatter. The work of Desprez indicates that the 
size of the kernel is a hereditar}^ equality. That being the case, it is 
evident that the small seed of the first separation may be composed 
partly of seed that is small on account of immaturity and partly of 
seed that is small by inheritance, but which is perfectly normal. 
When such seed is planted the immature seed will be largely elimi- 
nated in the crop, but the naturally small seed will have reproduced 
itself and will compose most of the crop. When the seed is again 
separated a much smaller percentage of small seed will be immature, 
and in consequence a larger number, of kernels will produce plants. 
It would appear from Desprez's experiments, however, that those 
plants producing small kernels are not so prolific as those producing 
large kernels. 

Sanborn's results make a very good showing for the small kernels, 
but, as before stated, the extreme irregularity would lead to the 
belief that the soil on the plots lacked uniformity, or that some other 
errors had influenced the results. To offset this the tests cover a 
period of four 3'ears, which shoidd help to rectify mistakes, and in 
consequence the good showing made l)y the small kernels is entitled 
to some consideration. 

Soule and Vanatter's results fulfill exactly the conditions of the 
hypothesis that the small seed would the first year contain a much 
larger proportion of immature kernels than it would in subsecjuent 
years, and hence yield more poorl}- the first year. Their results with 
heavy kernels as compared with ordinary" seed offer little encourage- 
ment to the continuous selection of large kernels. 



RELATION OF SIZE OF KERNEL TO NITROGEN CONTENT. 35 

The fact before referred to that both large and small kernels are 
found on the same head of wheat is perhaps an argument against the 
superior value of large seed. If the plant and not the seed is the unit 
of reproduction, small seed from a plant whose kernels averaged 
large size may be better than large seed from a plant whose kernels 
averaged small size. 

On the other hand, there can be no doubt that the majority of the 
kernels in the lot of heavy kernels would be from plants having large 
spikes, and vice versa. This would give the kernels in the heavy lot 
some advantage. Again, the advantage that the large kernel is sup- 
posed to possess for seed may not be in producing a large kernel in 
the resulting crop, but in giving the plant a better start in hfe, or 
producing a more vigorous plant. 

RELATION OF SIZE OF KERNEL TO NITROGEN CONTENT. 

Richardson" has made a large number of analyses of wheats from 
different parts of the United States. The weight of 100 kernels was 
also determined in each sample. There can not be said to be Sinj 
constant relation between the nitrogen content and the kernel weight, 
but in the main the large kernels have a lower percentage of nitrogen 
than the small kernels, and inversely. 

PagnouF' reports that in a test of eleven varieties of w^heat there 
was in the main a decrease in the percentage of nitrogen in the crop 
as compared with the seed when there was an increase in the w^eight 
of 1,000 kernels in the crop as compared with the seed. 

The same investigator' again states that in an examination of 
seventy" varieties of wheat there was no constant relation between 
the size of the kernels and their nitrogen content, but that in general 
the varieties with small kernels were the varieties richest in nitrogen. 

Marek'' separated wheat of the same variety into lots of large and 
of small kernels. He found on analj^sis that the large kernels con- 
tained 12.52 per cent protein and the small kernels 13.55 per cent 
protein. 

Woods and ]\Ierrill' made analyses of a number of wheats grow^n 
in Minnesota and of the same varieties grown in Maine. The wheats 
uniformly developed a larger kernel when grown in Maine. Grouping 
five varieties raised in Minnesota and five raised in Maine, it will be 
seen that with this increase in the size of the kernel there was a 

(' U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Chemistry, Bulletins 1 and 3. 
'' Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 189.3, p. 616, from Ann. Agron., 1892, p. 486. 
c Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1888, p. 767, from Ann. Agron., 14, pp. 262-272. 
'^ Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1876, from Landw. Zeitung f. Westfalen u. Lippe, 
1875, p. 362. 

i Maine Experiment Station Bulletin 97. 



36 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

decrease in the nitrogen content. The analyses, reduced to a water- 
free basis, are as follows: 



Where grown. 



Minnesota . 



Weight of 

100 kernels 

(grams). 



2. 239 
Maine ' 3. 109 



Percentage 
cf protein. 



16.22 
15.43 



In a review of the experiments concerning the relation of weight 
to composition of cereals, Gwallig" says that the results ol)tained 
by Marek, Wolhi}^, Marcker, Hoffmeister, and Nothwang divide 
barley and rye into one group, and wheat and oats into another, as 
regards this relation. With barley and rye, the largest, heaviest 
kernels are the richest in protein. With wheat and oats, the smallest, 
lightest kernels have the highest protein content. 

Gwallig says further that with an increased protein content there 
is a decrease in nitrogen-free extract. The fat and ash do not stand 
in a definite relation to the kernel weight, but the small, light kernels 
have a higher percentage of crude fiber, which circumstance is 
accounted for by the larger surface possessed l)y the smaller kernels. 

Snyder'^ has divided small kernels into two classes — those which 
are small because shrunken and tliose which are small although well 
filled. He finds that as between small kernels of the first class and 
large, well-fdled kernels, the former contain a higher percentage of 
nitrogen, l)ut as between the small, well-filled and the large, well-filled 
kernels, the latter contain the higher percentage of nitrogen. In 
testing this he used large and small kernels of the same variety in 
each case, and the wheats represented a large portion of the wheat- 
growing ai'ea of the United States. As regards the relation of large, 
perfect, and small, perfect kernels there were twenty-four out of 
twenty-seven cases in which the large kernels contained a greater 
percentage of nitrogen. 

Johannsen and Weis,'" in experiments with five varieties of wheat, 
find that as a general rule the percentage of nitrogen is increased 
witli increasing grain v/eight, but that there are many exceptions 
to tlie rule. 

Cobb'' states that small wheat kernels contain a larger proportion 
of gluten than do large ones, but he does not submit any analyses to 
substantiate his statement. 

"Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 24 (189.5), p. 388, from Lanchv. .TahrhucluT, 23 
(1834), p. 8.3.5. 

'' Minnesota Exporinient Station Bulletin 8.5. 

'■Al).stract, Experiment Station Record, 12, p. .327, from Tidsskr. Landl)r. Planteavl., 5 
(1899), pp. 91-100. 

''Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, .5 (1894), No. 4, pp. 239-2.50. 



INFLUENCE OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SEED KKRNEL. 



37 



Kornicke and Werner" quote the experiments of Reiset to show 
that shriveled kernels hav;^ a higher nitrogen content than plump 
ones. With different varieties of wheat he found the following: 



Variety. 



Snaldins 
Do. 

\'i:'tnria 
Do. 

-Vlbprt . . 
Do. 



Percent- 
age cf 

nitrcgen 
in dry 

matter. 



Shriveled 
Plump . . . 
Shriveled 
Plump... 
Shriveled 
Plump . . . 



2.48 
2.33 
2.44 
2.08 
2., 59 
2.35 



Carleton* records the weight of 100 kernels and the percentage of 
''albuminoids" in sixty-one samples of wheat from various parts of 
the world. Dividing these into classes according to the weight of 
100 kernels we have the following: 



Weight of 

100 kernels 

(grams). 


Average 

weight of 

kernels 

(grams). 


Percent- 
age of albu- 
minoids. 


Number 
of sam- 
ples. 


2 to 3 

3 to 4 
over 4 


2.66 
3.67 

4. .57 


14.58 
12.31 
11.62 


6 
25 
30 



Reviewing these experiments there would seem to be no doubt 
that shrunken kernels contain a higher percentage of nitrogen than 
do well-filled ones, but as between large and small kernels, both of 
which are well hlled, there is not a great deal of information. Snyder's 
experiments are the only ones that cover this ground, but they are 
extensive and very uniform, and may be considered as deciding the 
question in favor of a higher nitrogen content for the large kernels, 
so far as small, plump kernels and large, plump kernels are concerned. 
But, as small and light kernels are usually not plump, taking the 
crop as a whole and dividing it equally into large and small or 
heavy and light kernels, the evidence would be in favor of the small 
or light kernels for high nitrogen content. As between wheats Irom 
different regions and of different varieties, those having small kernels 
are generally of higher nitrogen content. 

INFLUENCE OF THE SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF THE SEED KERNEL UPON 

YIELD. 

Sanborn'" separated seed wheat with a sieve into large, medium, 
small, and shriveled kernels. The large seed was separated by means 

"Handbuch des Getreidebaues, 1, pp. 520-521, Berlin, 1884. 

''U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Vegetable Physiology and Pathology', 
Bulletin 24. 

^ Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 5, p. 58, from Utah Experiment Station Report, 
1892, pp. 133-135. 



38 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

of a brine solution into two nearl}^ equal parts. The seed thus sepa- 
rated was planted on separate plots. The experiment was con- 
tinued three years. The heavy seed yielded 10.8 bushels and the 
light 16.3 bushels per acre. Unselected seed yielded 16.4 bushels 
per acre. 

Seed wheat of four varieties was separated by Church" by means 
of solutions of calcium clilorid having specific gravities of 1.247, 
1.293, and 1.31. The seed was first treated with a solution of mer- 
curic chlorid to remove adherent air. Each lot of seed was planted 
separately. From the results the following conclusions are drawn: 

(1) The seed wheat of the greatest density produced the densest 
seed. 

(2) The seed wheat of the greatest density yielded the largest 
amount of dressed grain. 

(3) The seed of medium density generally gave the largest number 
of ears, but the ears were poorer than those from the densest seed. 

(4) Seed of medium density generally produced the largest number 
of fruiting plants. 

(5) The seed wheat that sank in water, but floated in a solution 
having the density 1.247, was of very low value, yielding on an 
average only 34.4 pounds of dressed grain for every 100 yielded by 
the densest seed. 

Haberlandt,'' as the result of experiments with several cereals, has 
shown that the comparative weight of kernels is transmitted to the 
grain resulting from this seed. This was the case with wheat, rye, 
barley, and oats. The results with wheat were as follows: 





Number of pounds. 


Weight of kernels. 




Light. 


Medium. 


Heavy. 




Grams. 
29.5 
34.3 


Grams. 
.31.2 
35.5 


Grams. 
33.0 




36.3 











Wollny'' objects to the results of the experiments by F. Haberlandt, 
Church, Trommer, Hellriegel, and Ph. Dietrich with various cereals, 
in which almost without exception the kernels of high specific gravity 
produced the best yields, because no distinction was made between 
absolute weight and specific gravit}^ in the kernels. He claims that 
the value of the seed lies in the kernels of absolutely heavy weight 
rather than in the kernels of high specific gravity. He concludes 
that the specific gravity of the seed exerts no influence on the yield 
of the crop. 

« Science with Practice. 
''Jahresb. Agr. Chem., 1866-67, p. 298. 

<^ Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1887, p. 169, from Forschungcn a.d. Gebiete Agri- 
kulturphysik, 9 (1886), pp. 207-216. 



SPECIFIC GEAVITY AND NITROGEN CONTENT. 39 

In the light of the experiments that have been conducted with 
seed wheat of high and low specific gravities, it would appear that, 
in general, seed of very low specific gravity does not yield well, and 
it is evident that such seed must be deficient in mineral matter and 
is probal)ly not normal in other respects. There would not appear, 
however, to be any marked difi'erence in the productive capacity of 
kernels of medium specific gravity and kernels of great specific 
gravity. 

RELATION OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF KERNEL TO NITROGEN CONTENT. 

Marek'' found that with an increase in the specific gravity of the 
kernel there was a decrease in nitrogen content. 

Pagnoul,* in testing seventy varieties of wheat, found that the 
nitrogen content rose with the specific gravity, but not regularly, 
and that a definite relation could not be traced. 

Wollny'' took kernels of horny structure and kernels of mealy 
structure. He says it is generally recognized that the hard, horii}^ 
kernels have a higher specific gravity, and that it is commonly 
attributed to their higher content of proteids. He contends that as 
starch has a higher specific gravity than protein the mealy kernels 
must really have a higher specific gravity than the horny ones. 

Kornicke and Werner'' state the specific gravities of the various 
chemical constituents of the wheat kernel as follows: Starch, 1.53; 
sugar, 1.60; cellulose, 1.53; fats, 0.91 to 0.96; gluten, 1.297; ash, 
2.50; water, 1.00; air, 0.001293. They state also (p. 121) that the 
specific gravity of the kernel does not stand in any relation to the 
volume weight, for the factor which results from weighing a certain 
volume mass is influenced by the air spaces between the kernels, and 
these depend upon the form and size as well as the surface and acci- 
dental structure of the kernel. They also contend that there is no 
relation between the volume weight and the content of proteid 
material. 

Schindler^ shows that by tabulating a large number of varieties 
of wheat from different parts of the world, and representing different 
varieties, there is no relation between the weight of 1,000 kernels 
and the volume weight of 100 c. c. By separating these into varieties, 
even when grown in different localities, kernels of the same variety 
did show a definite and constant relation. The volume weight 
increased with an increase in the weight of 1,000 kernels. 

« Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1876, p. 46, from Lanchv. Zeitung f . Westfalen u. 
Lippe, 1875, p. 362. 

& Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1888, p. 767, from Ann. Agron., 14, pp. 262-272. 

'"Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1887, p. 169, from Forschungen a. d. Gebiete Agri- 
kulturphysik, 9 (1886), pp. 207-216. 

'^Handbuch des Getreidebaues, 2, p. 120, Berlin, 1884. 

^Jour. Landw., 4.5 (1897), p. 61. 



■10 IMPROVING THE QQALITY OF WHEAT. 

There has long been a desire manifested by workers in this field to 
establish some definite relation between the specific gravity of the 
wheat kernel and its composition, or at least its nitrogen content. 
Very contradictory results have been obtained by several experi- 
menters, and little progress has been made. 

It is true that the various chemical constituents that go to com- 
pose the wheat kernel have different specific gravities, and as those 
of the carbohydrates are ail less than those of the proteids it 
might be argued that a wheat having a large proportion of proteid 
material would have a low specific gravity. However, the specific 
gravity of the ash is so much greater than that of any other constit- 
uent and the ash in wheats from different soils and climates varies so 
much that these factors completely prevent the establishment of a 
definite relation. The size and number of the vacuoles also influence 
the specific gravity. 

In general, it may be said that as between kernels of the same 
variety grown in the same season and upon the same soil, the specific 
gravity is inversely proportional to the nitrogen content. 

CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PRODUCTION OF NITROGEN IN THE GRAIN. 

So far as the writer has been able to ascertain there is' no literature 
bearing directly upon the conditions affecting the production of 
nitrogen in the grain of wheat. 

Regarding high nitrogen in the wheat crop as arising merely from 
failure on the part of the kernel to develop fully, it would seem that 
a high percentage of nitrogen would inevitably be accompanied b}^ 
a small production of nitrogen per acre. This, however, does not 
always appear to be the case. 

Taking, for instance, the yields of wheat obtained b}- Lawes and 
Gilbert-' for a period of twenty years, which they divide into two 
periods of good and of poor crops, each covering ten years, we have 
the following figures: 



Good crop seasons. 
Poor crop seasons. , 



^'''^^^S^ Yipld of 

yield of Weight | ^^^^^^f^ 

gram per per bushel "p,!"|,.p 

acre (pounds). , fP^' ^^'J^, 

(pounds). i Cpounas). 



1,833 ' 60.2 28.0 

1,740 I 57.1 29.8 



It will l)e noticed that the largest production of nitrogen per acre 
was in those years in which the weight per bushel and the yield per 
acre were least. 

Of course this is not always the case, but that it should occur at 
all is an indication that the conditions that make for high nitrogen 

" On the Composition of the Ash of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 



CONDITIONS AFFECTING PEODUCTION OF NITROGEN. 



41 



content in the grain also conduce to a large accumulation of nitrogen 
b}^ the crop, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the 
conditions which favor a large accumulation of nitrogen by the crop 
often result in giving it a high nitrogen content. 

Reference has already been made to the o])servations of Deherain 
and Dupont" on the wheat crops of 1888 and 1889 at Grignon. The 
figures for the yields of grain, the percentages of starch and gluten, 
and the production per acre of these constituents for the two years 
are as follows: 



Year. 


Yield of 

grain per 

hectare 

(kilos). 


Percentage of— 
Gluten. Starch. 


Gluten per 
hectare 

(kilos). 


Starch per 
hectare 
(kilos). 


1888 


3,445 
2,922 


12.6 
15.3 


77.2 
61.9 


434 
447 


2,659 
1,808 


1889 







From tliis it will be seen that for the year in which the yield of 
grain was less per acre the production of gluten per acre was greater. 
Apparently the conditions were favorable for a large accumulation 
of nitrogen by the plant in 1889, but were unfavorable to the pro- 
duction of starch. If the latter had not been the case, the crop of 
1889 would have been larger than the crop of 1888. 

A number of instances of this kind have occurred among the wheat 
crops at the Nebraska Experiment Station. In fact, it may be said 
that, in general, large yields of grain have there been accompanied 
by a low percentage of nitrogen per acre as compared with the same 
properties in small yields of grain. The following table will show 
this : 

Production of nitrogen per acre in xoheat raised at the Nebraska Experiment Station. 



Variety. 



Turkish Red. 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Yaroslav 

Do 

Do 

Weissenburg . 

Do 

Pester Boden. 

Do 



Average . 





Yield of 


Percent- 


Proteid 


Year 


grain 


age of 


nitrogen 




per acre 


proteid 


per acre 




(pounds). 


nitrogen. 


(pounds). 


1900 


1,980 


3.02 


52.73 


1901 


2.370 


2.00 


43.04 


1902 


1,800 


2.86 


51.48 


1903 


1,864 


2.40 


44.74 


1900 


1,320 


3.01 


34. .58 : 


1901 ■^ 


1,794 


2.18 


36.08 


1903 


o962 


2., 54 


24.43 


1902 


1,605 


3.16 


46.32 


1903 


1,891 


2.10 


39.71 


1902 


1,475 


2.92 


43.10 


1903 


1,830 


2.16 


39.53 


1,717 




41.43 







Date of 
ripen- 
ing. 



June 27 
June 24 
June 23 
July 9 
July 2 
July 1 
July 14 
June 24 
July 10 
June 24 
July 10 



n Yield decreased by lodging of grain. 



A word in regard to the character of the seasons that produced 
these crops may help to an understanding of their differences. 



a Ann. Agron., 28 (1902), ;i. 



42 IMPKOVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

The season of 1900 was rather dry and hot from the time growth 
started in the spring until harvest. There was no time when there 
was an abundant supply of moisture, but occasional rains wet the 
soil for a few da3's at a time. The temperatures during the da}" 
were high and the air was dry. In 1901 the spring was quite moist 
and cool until June, when it became extremely hot and dry. A few 
days before harvest the temperatures ranged above 100° F. daily, 
with no rainfall. The season of 1902 was the direct opposite of that 
of 1901, except that the change came earlier. It was extremely dry 
and hot until the middle of May, when abundant rains came, and 
the temperatures were considerably below normal until harvest. 
The season of 1903 was wet and cool throughout. 

In general, it may be said that in those seasons, like 1900 and 
1902, in which the temperatures were high and moisture scarce dur- 
ing all or the early part of the growing season, the grain had a high 
percentage of nitrogen, and there was a large production of nitrogen 
per acre. In years of low temperatures and abundant moisture, 
as in 1903, or even when such conditions obtained late in the sea- 
son, as in 1901, there were a low percentage of nitrogen in the grain 
and a small production of nitrogen per acre. 

High temperatures an<i scant moisture during early growth would, 
therefore, seem to favor the accumulation of nitrogen by the wheat 
plant. 

It may also be noted that these are the conditions favorable to 
the process of nitrification and to the accumulation of nitrates near 
the surface of the soil. 

Comparing the wheat crops grown at Rothamsted for a period of 
twenty years, the yields and nitrogen production of which have just 
been stated, with the averages for the Nebraska-grown wheats con- 
tained in the last table, it will be seen that the yields of grain were 
larger at Rothamsted, but that the production of nitrogen per acre 
was considerably greater in Nebraska. « 





station. 


Yield (in pounds) 
per acre of — 




Grain. 


Nitrogen. 




1,786 
1,717 


28.9 







41.4 









The maximum production of nitrogen per acre at Rothamsted 
during the twenty jesirs was 38.1 pounds, while at Nebraska it was 
52.7 pounds. 

There can be little doubt as to whether this difference was due 
in greater measure to soil fertility or to climate. Nowhere is better 

« The yield of nitrogen at Rothamsted is calculated from total organic nitrogen, while 
at the Nebraska Station it is from proteid nitrogen. 



CONDITIONS AFFECTING PRODUCTION OF NITROGEN. 43 

tillage given or are crops more scientificallY provided with food 
than at Rothanisted. It is true that of the ten plots of land on 
which these wheats were raised one received no manure and three 
were not sufRciently manured. In order to make the comparison 
more favorable to the English environment, the five plots completely 
manured and producing the largest yields may be taken. The yield 
of nitrogen per acre was 36.4 pounds for the years 1852-1861 and 
34.6 pounds for 1862-1871. Even with the best manuring the yields 
of nitrogen fall very much short of those in Nebraska. 

In Nebraska no commercial fertilizers had ever been used on the 
land on which the wheats were grown, but farm manure had been 
applied. The soil was a heavy one, well adapted to wheat growing, 
and had been well tilled. It had been well manured for corn in a 
rotation of corn, oats, and wheat. The varieties, with the exception 
of Turkish Red, had just been introduced from Europe and had not 
fully adapted themselves to the new environment. The average 
nitrogen production for the only acclimated variet}-, Turkish Red, 
was 48 pounds per acre. It would seem, therefore, that a climate 
affording high temperatures, dry air, and a moderately dry soil is 
favorable to the accumulation of a large amount of nitrogen by the 
wheat plant, provided there is a large supph^ of nitrogen in the soil. 

The heat and scant soil moisture are doubtless instrumental in 
making available the nitrogen of the humus, and the bright sunshine 
and dry, hot air stimulate growth and increase transpiration. 

It has just been said that hot, dry weather in the early growing- 
season contributes to a large nitrogen accumulation by the wheat 
plant. The same conditions cut short the growing period of the 
plant and prevent the large accumulation of starch that takes place 
in the kernel of wheat raised in a cool or moist region. It thus 
happens that such wheats are high in nitrogen and low in starch. 

The properties of the wheat kernel characteristic of a continental 
climate and rich soil are probably due to rapid nitrification and 
highly stimulated growth causing a large accumulation of nitrogen 
b}" the crop, and to incomplete maturation, caused either by heat, 
or frost, or lack of moisture, resulting in high nitrogen. 

It would be interesting to know what relation the production of 
nitrogen per acre bears to the production of mineral matter, but 
the necessary figures are not at hand. 

The wheat kernel produced in a continental climate is not usually 
plump as compared with the kernel produced in an insular or coastal 
one. The yield of grain per acre is also usually less. That this is 
due to incomplete maturation is shown by the fact that winter 
varieties of wheat that make their growth early in the season always 
yield better than spring varieties. The latter, on the other hand, 
have a higher percentage of nitrogen, but usualh^ not so large a 



44 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

nitrogen production. Their disadvantage lies in the fact that their 
roots are not sufficiently developed to absorb a large cjuantity of 
nitrogenous matter at the time most favorable for its accumulation. 
As a maximum nitrogen accumulation is the chief desideratum, 
spring wheats are not desirable where winter ones can be grown. 

This does not mean that a variety of wheat which has been grown, 
for instance, in England will show all the equalities of an inland 
wheat when first grown in Kansas or Nebraska. Such a wheat will 
undergo modifications that will give it some of these qualities, such, 
for instance, as less well-filled kernels, and less weight per bushel. 
On the other hand, the Turkish Red wheat, when raised in a cool, 
moist climate, becomes later maturing, and the kernel becomes 
plumper, more starchy, and softer. It is between varieties adapted 
each to its peculiar climate, and raised there for years, that these 
distinctions are most marked, but the fact that a modification of 
any variety begins at once when transferred from one climate to 
another shows that such qualities as those mentioned are influenced 
by the climate. 

It must be quite apparent, although it has not often been remarked, 
that the ordinary selection of seed wheat to increase the yield has 
resulted in producing a grain of lower nitrogen content. 

This has been noticed by Girard and Lindet " and by Biffen, * and 
incidentally by Balland,^' who, in commenting on the decrease in 
the nitrogen content of wheat in northern France and the increased 
yields, attributes the former to a deficiency of nitrogen in the fer- 
tilizers used, and states that the gluten in the wheat of that region 
in 1848 ranged from 10.23 to 13.02 per cent, while fifty jea,rs later 
it ranged from 8.96 to 10.62 per cent. In the same time the aver- 
age yield increased from 14 to 17.5 hectoliters per hectare. In the 
light of the results of experiments to ascertain the effect of nitroge- 
nous fertilizers upon the composition of wheat, it can not be supposed 
that this decrease in nitrogen content can be due primarily to lack 
of nitrogen. It would seem more likely that the increased yield 
was largely due to the deposition of starch in the grain, and that 
consequently the percentage of gluten was smaller. 

Has the improvement in the yield of wheat been accompanied by- 
a greater yield of nitrogen per acre? It is evident that the increase 
in the grain and that in the nitrogen are not proportional, but it is 

« Le Froment et sa Monture, Paris, 1903. 

6 Nature (London), 69 (1903), No. 1778, pp. 92, 93. 

c Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1897, p. 785, from Compt. Rend., 124 (1897), 
p. 1.58. 



CONDITIONS AFFECTING PRODUCTION OF NITROGEN. 



45 



desirable to know whether there has been any increase in nitrogen 
per acre. Returning to the figures given by Bahand it will be seen 
that the wheat of 1848 produced on an average 163 kilos per hec- 
tare, while that of fifty years later produced 171 kilos, an increase 
of about 5 per cent in gluten per hectare, with an increase of 25 per 
cent in yield. These figures can not, of course, be taken as strictly 
accurate, as they are based merely on what M. Balland refers to as 
the range of nitrogen content. 

Some data on this subject are available in the published records 
of wheat" improvement at the Minnesota Experiment Station." 
Yields and gluten content of improved varieties and of the original 
variety from which the improved strains have been developed by 
selection are given. The figures cover the same seasons for all 
varieties, and the averages of six trials are reported for each, as 
follows: 



Variety. 


Yield per 

acre 
(bushels). 


Percent- 
age of 
dry glu- 
ten. 


Gluten Nitrogen 
per acre per acie 
(pounds). I (pounds). 


Minnesota No. 149, produced from Power's Fife 

Power's Fife, unmodified bv selection . 


25.6 
23.6 
28.5 
24.6 


13.5 
14.0 
12. 5 
13.4 


207.4 
198.2 
213.7 
198.8 


36.4 
34.8 


Minnesota No. It-Q, produced from Hayne's Blue Stem 

Havne's Blue Stem, unmodified bv selection 


37.5 
34.7 







In each case the new variety yielded more grain per acre, possessed 
a lower gluten content, and produced more nitrogen per acre in the 
grain. It should be explained that determinations of gluten and 
baking tests were made of strains of wheat produced by the selection 
of individual plants, and that the quantity and quality of the gluten 
in these strains were considered in deciding which strain was to be 
perpetuated. For that reason the gluten content of the improved 
wheat is doubtless greater than it would have been if no attention 
had been paid to those qualities. Incidentally it ma}^ be stated 
that the quality of the gluten in these new vaiieties of wheat origi- 
nated by Professor Hays is much better than that in the original 
varieties. The difference between selection for gluten carried on in 
this way and selection for gluten applied to the individual plant is 
that the latter must increase many times the opportunity for devel- 
oping a strain of desira'ole gluten content. 

Returning to the nitrogen production per acre, it is apparent that 
it is slightly greater in the improved wheats, or at least is not less 
than in the original varieties. This is encouraging, as it indicates 
the possibility of increasing the production of gluten per acre. 

« Minnesota Experiment Station Bulletin 63. 



46 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

Gluten is the valuable constituent of wheat. The wheat growing 
of the future may be looked upon as a gluten-producing industry. 
The problem is to secure the highest possible quantity and quality 
of gluten per acre. If this can be done by sacrificing starch produc- 
tion, it will be economical. Starch can be more cheaply produced 
in other crops and, if necessary, added to the flour of wheat. 

It may be argued that this is not to the interest of the farmer. 
But it is clearh^ to the interest of mankind and any step toward 
its accomplishment must in the end redound to the advantage of 
the farmer. 



I'.A-IIT II 



EXPEBIMENTAL 



47 



SOME PROPERTIES OE THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



If a number of wheat kernels of the same variety and raised under 
similar conditions are separated into approximately equal parts with 
regard to their specific gravity, the kernels of low specific gravity 
will be found to contain a higher percentage of both total and proteid 
nitrogen than the kernels having a high specific gravity. 

A number of samples of wheat grown in different years and repre- 
senting different varieties were separated into approximately equal 
parts by throwing the kernels into a solution of calcium chlorid hav- 
ing such a density that about half the kernels would float and the 
other half sink. The specific gravity of the solution in which each 
sample was separated is given in Table 1 and the signs < and > are 
used to represent "less than" and "greater than," respectively. 
Thus " <1.29" means that the kernels have a specific gravity of less 
than 1.29, while ">1.29" indicates that the kernels have a specific 
gravity greater than 1.29. 

Table 1. — Analyses of kernels of high and of low specific gravity . 



Serial number. 



Specific 
gra\-ity. 



1 <1.290 

2 >1.290 

30 <1.286 

31 >1.286 

38 <1.250 

39 >1.2o0 

40 <1.265 

41 >1.265 

59 <1.264 

60 1 >1.264 



Percentage of 


- 


Total 


Proteid 


Nonpro- 

teid 
nitrogen. 


nitrogen. 


nitrogen." 


3.51 


2.49 


1.02 


3.27 


2.39 


.88 


2.51 


1.88 


.63 


2.51 


1.94 


.57 


2.80 


2.26 


• .54 


2.78 


2.15 


.63 


2.95 


2.13 


.82 


2.66 


2.01 


.65 


3.30 


2.41 


.89 


3.06 


2.29 


.77 



Name of variety and year of 
growtfi. 



•Hickman, grown in 1895. 

Turkish Red, grown in 1897. 

\Spring wheat, Marvel, grown 
■ in 1897. 

Spiing wheat, Velvet Chaff 
grown in 1897. 

[■Turkish Red, grown in 1898. 



a Proteid nitrogen in this ppper = nitrogen by Stutzer's method. Proteids = proteid nitrogen x 5.7. 

With the exception of serial Nos. 30 and 31 the kernels of low 
specific gravity have in each case a higher percentage of both total 
and proteid nitrogen than have the kernels of high specific gravity. 
It will also be noticed that the percentage of nonproteid nitrogen is 
greater in the kernels of low specific gravity. 

Samples of wheat were also divided into light and heavy portions 
by means of a machine which operates ])y directing upward a current 
of air, the velocity of which can be regulated. Into this current the 
grain is directed. The result is that the heavy kernels and the large 

27889— No. 78—05 4 49 



50 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



kernels fall, and the light kernels and small kernels are driven out. 
The separation thus accomplished is somewhat different from that 
effected by a solution, the difference being that the latter separates 
the kernels entirely according to their specific gravities while with 
the air blast a large kernel of a certain specific gravity might descend 
with the heavy kernels, when if it were smaller, although of the same 
specific gravity, it would be blown out. 

The number of light kernels that descend on account of their large 
size is relatively small, owing to the fact that large kernels are, as a 
rule, of higher specific gravity than small ones. The following test 
was made to determine the relation between the size of wheat ker- 
nels and their specific gravity. An average lot of wheat was nearly 
equally divided by means of two sieves into three portions represent- 
ing medium, small, and large kernels. Each of these portions was 
then thrown upon solutions of the same specific gravity, and the pro- 
portion by weight that floated, or light seed, and the proportion that 
sank, or heavy seed, were determined. 

Table 2. — Proportion of light and of heavy seed. 





Kind of seed. 


Heavy seed 


Light seed 


Ratio. 




(grams) . i (grams) . 


Heavy. 


Light. 


Small 


8.72 
9.62 
11.96 


11.28 
10.78 
8.04 


1 
1 
1 


1.29 


Medium 


1.12 


Large 


.67 







The weight of light kernels among the small was nearly twice that 
of light kernels among the large seeds. 

Analyses of samples of wheat separated by this machine into light 
and heavy kernels gave about the same results as the samples sepa- 
rated by solutions of certain specific gravities. 

Table 3. — Analyses of large, heavy Icernels and of small, light Icernels. 





Relative 
weight. 


Percentage of— 




Serial number. 


Total 
nitrogen. 


Proteid 
nitrogen. 


Nonpro- 

teid 
nitrogen. 


Name of variety and year of 
growth. 


9 


Light 


2.99 
2.76 
2.77 
2.70 
2.91 
2.65 
2.45 
2.19 
3.12 
3.02 
3.13 
2.95 
3.30 
2.46 
2.35 
2.11 


2.21 
2I04 
2.11 
2.04 
2.29 
2.04 
2.00 
1.96 
3.10 
2.93 
2.82 
2.65 
3.06 
2.24 
2.13 
1.94 


0.78 
.72 
.66 
.66 
.62 
.61 
.45 
.23 
.02 
.09 
.31 
.30 
.24 
.22 
.22 
.17 


\ Spring wheat, Marvel, grown 
1 in 1896. 


10 .... 


Heavy 

Light 


57 




58 


Heavy 

Light 




65 


[•Spring wheat, grown in 1898. 
[•Big Frame, grown in 1899. 


66. 


Heavy 

Light 


80 


81. . 


Heavv 

Light 


383 


JTurkish Red, grown in 1900. 


384 

385 


Heavy 

Light 


386 

602 


Heavy 

Light 


[Big Frame, grown in 1900. 
>Big Frame, grown in 1901. 


603 


Heavy 

Light 


613 


JTurkish Red, grown in 1901. 


612 


Heavy 





SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 51 

It thus becomes very apparent that the percentage of nitrogen is 
relatively greater in the light wheat selected in the manner described. 

It is well known that immature wheat is of lighter weight than 
mature wheat and that it contains a greater percentage of nonproteid 
nitrogen. In a field of wheat there are alw^ays certain plants that 
mature early, others that mature late, and some that never reach a 
normal state of maturity. The last condition is very likely to occur 
in a region of limited rainfall and intense summer heat. The con- 
ditions most favorable for the filling out of the grain are shown to be 
an abundance of soil moisture and a fair degree of warmth. The 
more nearly the conditions are the reverse of this the more shriveled 
the kernel and the lighter the weight. In the same variety and in 
the same field there are kernels that are small and shriveled because 
of immaturity, disease, or lack of nutriment. All of these classes 
would appear among the "light" kernels separated in this way. 

In order to approach the question from another standpoint, a num- 
ber of spikes of wheat of the Turkish Red variety were selected in the 
field, care being taken that all were fully ripe, and that they were 
composed of healthy, well-formed kernels. These spikes were sam- 
pled by removing one row of spikelets from each spike and the kernels 
so removed were tested for moisture, proteid nitrogen, specific 
gravity, and weight of kernel, and from the last tw^o the relative 
volume was calculated. It will be shown later that a sample taken 
in this way permits of an accurate estimation of the average com- 
position of the kernels on the spike. 

The number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the row of spikelets 
on each spike was calculated from the data mentioned, and the 
average weight of the kernels on the row of spikelets w as determined 
from their total weight and number, thus permitting of the estima- 
tion of the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the average kernel 
on each spike. 

In Table 4 the spikes having a proteid nitrogen content of from 2 to 
2.5 per cent are arranged in one group, and on the same line with each 
spike are placed the number of kernels on one row of spikelets, weight 
of these kernels, weight of average kernel, relative volume of average 
kernel, specific gravity of kernel, grams of proteid nitrogen in one 
row of spikelets, and grams of proteid nitrogen in average kernel. 
Spikes having a proteid nitrogen content of from 2.5 to 3 per cent are 
similarly arranged, and so with all spikes up to 4 per cent. The aver- 
age for each group is shown in the table. 

There are, in all, 257 spikes, of which 18 have from 2 to 2.5 per cent 
proteid nitrogen, 82 from 2.5 to 3 per cent, 107 from 3 to 3.5 per cent, 
and 49 from 3.5 to 4 per cent. 



52 



IMPROVING TH?: QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 4. — Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of kernels. 

Crop of 1902. 



2 TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



Record 
number. 


Number 
of ker- 
nels on 
row of 

spikelets. 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Volume 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


Specific 
gravity 
of ker- 
nels. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 

(gram) in — 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


183 

188 

193 

205 


17 
16 
14 
15 
18 
21 
22 
15 
15 
21 
14 
19 
17 
2L 
13 


0.4772 
.4425 
.3724 

.4824 
.5221 
.5336 
. 6708 
.4549 
.4063 
.6689 
.4336 
.4787 
.4594 
.5878 
.2771 
.4566 
.4110 
.4318 


0.0280 
.0276 
.0266 
.0321 
.0290 
.0254 
.0304 
.0303 
.0270 
.0318 
.0309 
.0251 
.0258 
.0279 
.0213 
.0268 
.0256 
.0269 






2.06 
2.37 
2.41 
2.41 
2.23 
2.24 
2.02 
2.44 
2.36 
2.33 
2.35 
2.28 
2.33 
2.44 
2.44 
2.36 
2.38 
2.37 


0.00983 
.01049 
.00897 


0.000577 
.000654 
. 000642 










0.0241 
.0209 
.0189 
.0220 
.0216 
.0192 
.0235 
.0225 
.0183 
.0188 
.0200 


1.3323 
1.3850 
1.3424 
1.3853 
1.4031 
1.4074 
1.3544 
1.3735 
1.3680 
1.3718 
1.3915 


.01548 


000774 


291 

304 

318 

347 

357 

358 

380 

396 

402 

406 

415 


.01616 
.01195 
.01354 
.01110 
.00959 
.01559 
.01019 
.01091 
.01070 
.01434 
.00676 


.000647 
.000569 
.000614 
.000739 
.000637 
.000742 
.000726 
.000572 
.000601 
.000681 
nnn.wn 


440 i 17 

444 1 16 

445 16 






.01078 ' .000632 
.00978 ! .000609 
.01023 I .000638 








Average... 








17 


.4759 .0266 


.0209 1.374 


2.323 


.01141 .000643 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



181 
182 
185 
187 
189 
196 
197 
199 
207 
210 
211 
212 
217 
218 
219 
222 
227 
229 
230 
238 
239 
241 
242 
252 
277 
288 
289 
293 
294 
302 
306 
308 
315 
319 
320 
322 
329 
330 
332 
334 
335 
337 
340 
341 
342 
343 
344 
345 
346 
348 



0.4482 
.4299 
.5041 
.3945 
.4871 
.4995 
.5683 
.4589 
.4584 
.3955 
.5211 
.4298 
.6299 
.5130 
.3862 
.4611 
. 5581 
.4849 
.4867 
.5166 
.3910 
.4230 
.4562 
.4898 
.3792 
.4956 
.5042 
.4858 
.4173 
.5569 
.4922 
.4951 
.4994 
.4644 
.5668 
.5107 
.3903 
.3431 
.4847 
.5399 
.6474 
.4497 
.4155 
.5058 
.4486 
.4112 
.4004 
.5422 
.6393 
.6328 



0.0235 
.0252 
.0265 
.0263 
.0270 
.0293 
.0284 
.0269 
.0305 
.0282 
.0306 
.0286 
.0349 
.0285 
.0203 
.0242 
.0293 
.028.5 
.0324 
.0303 
.0230 
.0235 
.0253 
.02578 
.0270 
.0291 
.0265 
.0285 
.0219 
.0253 
.0258 
.0330 
.0312 
.0273 
.0314 
.0219 
.0325 
.0201 
.0302 
.0299 
.0359 
.0299 
.0207 
.0337 
.0320 
.0316 
.0250 
.0301 
.0336 
.0351 



0.0230 
.0288 
.0228 
.0211 
.0259 
.0214 
.0157 
.0182 
.0214 
.0206 
.0234 
.0220 
.01649 
.0178 
.0184 
.0186 
.0203 
.0217 
.0187 
.0206 
.0159 
.0190 
.0185 
.0237 
.0224 
.0203 
.0229 
.0236 
.0234 
.0161 
.0218 
.0215 
.0258 
.0215 
.0153 
.0243 
.0228 
.0224 
.0184 
.0216 
.0242 
.0262 



1.3248 

1.2363 

1.3416 

1.3537 

1.3461 

1.3303 

1.2950 

1.3331 

1.3704 

1.3856 

1 . 3815 • 

1.3794 

1.3941 

1.3196 

1.3753 

1.3875 

1.3286 

1.3428 

1.4155 

1.3835 

1.3813 

1.3312 

1.3996 

1.392 

1.3916 

1.3447 

1.3710 

1.352 

1.3911 

1.2498 

1.3879 

1.3922 

1.3928 

1.3877 

1.3550 

1.3890 

1.4037 

1.4107 

1.3611 

1.3919 

1.3913 

1.3415 



2.66 
2.76 
2.71 
2.99 
2.64 
2.71 
2.85 
2.99 
2.73 
2.95 
2.90 
2.97 
2.86 
2.58 
2.71 
2.93 
2.71 
2.96 
2.54 
2.70 
2.60 
2.76 
2.96 
2.55 
2.86 
2.82 
2.53 
2.64 
2.56 
2.68 
2.51 
2.85 
2.75 
2.86 
2.98 
2.55 
2.88 
2.62 
2.58 
2.62 
2.82 
2.89 
2.74 
2.97 
2.60 
2.50 
2.93 
2.56 
2.55 
2.88 



0.01192 
.01187 
.01366 
.01180 
.01286 
.01354 
.01620 
.01372 
.01709 
.01167 
.01511 
.01277 
.01802 
.01324 
.01047 
.01351 
. 01624 
.01387 
.01236 
.01395 
.01017 
.01168 
.01350 
.01249 
.01085 
.01398 
.01276 
.01283 
.01068 
.01437 
.01235 
.01411 
.01373 
.01328 
.01689 
.01302 
.01241 
.00899 
.01251 
.01415 
.01826 
.01345 
.01138 
.01502 
.01166 
. 01028 
.01173 
.01388 
.01630 
.01822 



0.000625 
.000696 
.000718 
.000786 
.000713 
.000794 
.000809 
.000804 
.000833 
.000832 
.000887 
.000849 
.000998 
.000735 
.000550 
.000709 
.000794 
. 000844 
.000823 
.001)818 
.000598 
.000o49 
.000749 
.000o55 
.000772 
.000821 
.000670 
.000752 
.000561 
.000678 
. 000650 
.000941 
.000858 
.000781 
. 000938 
.000813 
.000936 
.000527 
.000779 
.000783 
.001012 
.000864 
. 000567 
.001001 
.000832 
. 000791 
.000733 
.000771 
.0008.57 
.001010 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 5o 

Table 4. — Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitro<jen content of kernels. 

Crop of 1902 — Continued. 

2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Record 
number. 


Number 
of ker- 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Volume 


Specific 


Percent- 
age of 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


nels on 

row of ' K-pmpW 


Average . "^^Jf'^''- 
kernef "^^l- 


of ker- i nitrogen 
nels. in ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


349 

350 

354 

355 

356......... 

359 

360 

361 

364 

371 

373 

376 


17 
16 
21 
16 
19 
15 
24 
14 
18 
18 
18 
12 
14 
12 
16 
19 
21 


0.4573 
.4437 
.6386 
.5008 
.5304 
.3882 
.6375 
.3297 
.4724 
..5695 
.5861 
.2677 
.4099 
.3416 
.4921 
.5177 
. 58.30 


0.0269 
.0277 
.0304 
.0313 
.0279 
.0259 
.0265 
.0235 
.0262 
.0316 
.0325 
.0223 
.0292 
.0284 
.0307 
.0272 
.0277 
.0221 
.0232 
.0243 
.0282 

.024K 


0.0195 
.0199 
.0217 
.0223 
.0200 
.0186 
.0191 
.0170 
.0191 
.0227 
.0235 
.0162 
.0212 
.0206 
.0223 
.0198 
.0204 
.0171 
.0165 
.0180 
.0206 


1.3822 

1.3S91 

1.4002 

1.4022 

1.390 

1.3915 

1..S840 

1.3819 

1.3729 

1.3906 

1.3838 

1.3747 

1.3761 

1.3771 

1.3741 

1.3758 

1.3569 

1.2947 

1.4070 

1.3508 

1.3693 


2.66 
2.64 
2.73 
2.84 
2.91 
2.97 
2.89 
2.94 
2.92 
2.99 
2.87 
2.60 
2.75 
2.96 
2.52 
2.73 
2.96 
2.94 
2.70 
2.77 
2.98 
2.86 
2.53 
2.62 
2.60 
2.82 
2.86 
2.88 
2.67 
2.98 
2.93 
2.51 


0.01216 
.01171 
.01743 
.01422 
.01,543 
.01153 
.01842 
.00969 
.01379 
.01703 
.01682 
.00696 
.01127 
.01011 
.01240 
.01413 
.01726 
. 01043 
.00943 
.01079 
.014,32 
.00986 
.00784 
.01308 
.01205 
.01611 
.01322 
.01768 
.01868 
.01669 
.01561 
.01037 


0.000716 
.000731 
.000830 
.000889 
.000812 
.000769 
.0(K)766 
.000691 
. 000765 
.000945 
.01D0933 
.000.580 
.000803 
.000841 
.000774 
.000743 
.000820 
. 000650 
. 00(3626 
.000673 
.000840 
.000704 
.000521 
.000726 
. 000707 
. (X)0S94 
. 0OOS27 
. 000834 
. 000812 
.000927 
.000820 
.000796 


378 

383 

386 

387 

389... 


392 

393 

394 

395 

419 


16 . ,3547 

15 . ,3491 

16 ..3897 

17 .4805 
14 .3448 


421 

424 

428 

430 

434 

436 

438 

439 

441 

443 

Average... 


15 .3097 t .0206 
18 i .4991 : .0277 






17 : .4635 

18 , .5714 
16 . 4624 


.0272 
.0317 
.0289 








22 
23 
18 
19 
13 


.6138 
.6997 
.5600 
.5327 
.4131 


.0279 
.0304 
.0311 
.0280 
.0317 














17.07 


.4791 j .0279 .0207 1 1.3680 

1 1 


2.76 .01332 


.000776 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



173 
175 
176 
190 
191 
192 
194 
195 
198 
200 
202 
203 
206 
208 
213 
214 
216 
220 
223 
226 
228 
231 
232 
233 
234 
236 
243 
244 
249 
250 
251 
255 
256 
258 



0. 5913 


0.0295 
.0274 
.0290 
.0259 
.0251 
.0242 
.0247 
.0259 
.0260 
.0320 
.0273 






3.08 
3.46 
3.10 
3.25 
3.25 
3.12 
3.43 
3.33 
3.18 
3.24 
3.13 


0.01821 
.01997 
.01799 
.01519 
.01091 
.01287 
.01104 
.01640 
.01489 
.01868 
.01197 


0.000909 
.000948 
.000899 
.000842 
.000816 
.0007,55 
.000847 
.000862 
.000827 
.001040 
.0008,54 


.5773 






.5804 






.4673 






.4279 






.4126 






.3218 






.4924 






.4683 






..5764 






.3824 


0.0200 


1.3615 


.,5251 


.0328 


.0241 


1.3614 


3.07 


.01612 


.001007 


.3392 


.0199 


.0157 


1.2709 


3.44 


.01166 


.000685 


.4939 


.0259 


.0192 


1.3494 


3.21 


.01585 


.000831 


.4116 


.0274 


.0204 


1..S415 


3.31 


.01362 


.000907 


.4371 


.0273 


.0208 


1.3082 


3.09 


.01351 


.000844 


.3122 


.0208 


.0165 


1.2588 


3.33 


.01040 


.000693 


.5040 


.0296 


.0222 


1.3350 


3.20 


.01613 


.000947 


.4795 


.0282 


.0204 


1.3970 


3,31 


.01587 


.000933 


.5380 


.0256 


.0170 


1.4951 


3.11 


.01673 


.000796 


.4143 


.0295 


.0211 


1.3945 


3.40 


.01409 


.001003 


.5888 


.0327 


.0242 


1.3514 


3.11 


.01831 


.001017 


.3825 


.0294 


.0221 


1.3280 


3.11 


.01190 


.000914 


.5331 


.0313 


.0231 


1.35,58 


3.32 


.01663 


.001039 


.5201 


.0325 


.0243 


1.3363 


3,23 


.01680 


.0010,50 


.7451 


.0298 


.0220 


1,3504 


3,19 


.02377 


.000951 


.6349 


.0264 


.0196 


1. 3487 


3,47 


.02203 


.000916 


.5839 


.0307 


.0214 


1. 4305 


3.30 


.01927 


.001013 


.4415 


.0275 


.0199 


1.3850 


3,21 


.01417 


.000883 


.4514 


.0300 


.0213 


1.4100 


3,12 


.01408 


.000936 


.6190 


.0281 


.0203 


1.3823 


3,46 


.02142 


.000972 


.5948 


.0330 


.0233 


1.4146 


3,03 


.01802 


.001000 


.,5277 


.0251 


.0184 


1.3629 


3.31 


.01747 


.000832 


.4703 


.0276 


.0211 


1.3065 


3.38 


.01590 


.000933 



54 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 4. — Analyses of spil-es of ivheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of l-ernels. 

Crop of i90^— Continued. 

3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Record 
number. 



Number 
of ker- 
nels on 
row of 

spikelets. 



Weight (in grams) 
of— 



Average 
kernel. 



Volume 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 



Specific 
gravity 
of ker- 
nels. 



Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 



Kernels. 



Average 
kernel. 



262 

263 

264 

265 

266 

269 

270 

271 

272 

273 

275 

276 

278 

281 

282 

295 

300 

301 

305 

307 

310 

312 

314 

316 

317 

321 

323 

324 

325 

327 

333 

336 

339 

351 

352 

353 

362 

366 

367 

368 

369 

370 

372 

374 

375 

377 

379 

381 

382 

388 

390 

391 

399 

400 

401 

403 

404 

410 

411 

414 

416 

418 

423 

425 

426 

427 

429 

431 

432 

433 

437 

442 

Average . 



0.4604 
. 5040 
.4138 
.4429 
.5010 
.4531 
.5183 
.3275 
.3858 
.4559 
.4862 
.3973 
.4715 
.6938 
.4973 
.5205 
.4994 
.5492 
.3452 
.4122 
.4867 
.4324 
.4122 
.41.57 
.4412 
.5484 
.4075 
.4230 
.5110 
.4039 
.4610 
.3637 
.3803 
.3843 
.4497 
.4726 
..5258 
.4214 
.5351 
.3877 
.5560 
.4200 
.4811 
.5249 
.5147 
.3173 
.5271 
.3506 
.5057 
.5799 
.4764 
.4474 
.3058 
.5720 
.3996 
.5000 
. 4286 
..5368 
.3479 
.5044 
.4269 
.4995 
.4845 
.4801 
.5166 
.5433 
.4704 
.4119 
.6306 
. 5206 
.4336 



0.0255 
.0280 
.0229 
.0246 
.0263 
.0266 
.0259 
.0233 
.0257 
.0253 
.0270 
.0264 
.0314 
.0330 
.0276 
.0273 
.0262 
.0343 
.0265 
.0206 
.0270 
.0288 
.0274 
.0244 
. 02.59 
.0304 
.0239 
.0248 
.0300 
.02.52 
.0288 
.0279 
.0237 
.0256 
.0299 
.0295 
.0276 
.0247 
.0267 
.0204 
.0292 
.0247 
.0283 
.0308 
.0285 
.0226 
.0292 
.0269 
.0266 
.0305 
.0250 
.0248 
.02.54 
.0286 
.0249 
.0294 
.0238 
.0268 
.0248 
.0265 
.0284 
.0237 
.0269 
.0300 
.0287 
.0285 
.0235 
.0228 
.0300 
.0260 
.0271 
.0228 

.0270 



0.0193 
.0197 
.0169 
.0189 
.0187 
.0209 
.0191 
.0177 
.0190 
.0178 
.0197 
.0191 
.0226 
.0241 
.0200 
.0201 
.0188 
.0249 
.0197 
.0140 
.0198 
.0210 
.0201 
.0178 
.0193 
.0207 
.0177 
.0180 
.0220 
.0191 
.0206 
.0198 
.0171 
.0186 
.0217 
.0211 
.0201 
.0185 
.0197 
.0151 
.0214 
.0180 
. 0206 
.0218 
.0203 
.0174 
.0213 
.0199 
.0194 
.0221 
.0181 
.0182 
.0188 
.0206 
.0183 
.0211 
.0180 



1.3216 
1.4206 
1.3544 
1.3005 
1.4090 
1 . 2748 
1.3541 
1.3143 
1.3564 
1.4228 
1.3711 
l.,3815 
1.3903 
1.3693 
1.3795 
1.3608 
1.3945 
1.3787 
1.3432 
1.4727 
1.3681 
1.3718 
1.36,57 
1.3733 
1.3424 
1.4660 
1.3487 
1.3740 
1.3658 
1.3225 
1.39.56 
1.4112 
1.3828 
1.3812 
1.. 38-^9 
1.3988 
1..3"01 
1.33.50 
1.3.555 
1.3497 
1.3621 
1.3735 
1.3714 
1.4142 
1.4018 
1.3013 
1.3703 
1.3544 
1.3728 
1.3773 
1.3806 
1.3628 
1.3510 
1.3837 
1.3575 
1..3927 
1.3221 



3.20 
3.24 
3.37 
3.30 
3.11 
3.21 
3.. 37 
3.39 
3.14 
3.39 
3.33 
3.15 
3.12 
3.26 
3.02 
3.06 
3.07 
3.09 
3.07 
3.19 
3.16 
3.49 
3.16 
3.36 
3.43 
3.43 
3.43 
3.19 
3.46 
3. 45 
3.26 
3.36 
3.33 
3.32 
3.05 
3.11 
3.03 
3.17 
3.37 
3.06 
3.34 
3.09 
3.31 
3.15 
3.41 
3.47 
3.09 
3.45 
3.23 
3.05 
3.22 
3.26 
3.10 
3.35 
3.37 
3.04 
3.30 
3.27 
3.15 
3.14 
3.24 
3.05 
3.14 
3.30 
3.09 
3.06 
3.04 
3.20 
3.00 
3.12 
3.13 
3.23 

3.23 



0.01473 
.01633 
.01395 
.01462 
.01558 
.01454 
.01747 
.01110 
.01212 
.01546 
.01619 
.01251 
.01471 
.02262 
.01502 
. 01593 
.01533 
.01697 
.01060 
.01315 
.01538 
.01509 
.01303 
.01397 
.01513 
.01881 
.01398 
.01349 
.01768 
.01393 
.01503 
.01222 
.01266 
.01276 
.01372 
.01470 
.01.593 
.01336 
.01803 
.01186 
.01857 
.01298 
.01593 
.01653 
.01755 
.01101 
.01629 
.01210 
.01633 
.01769 
.01534 
.014.59 
.00948 
.01916 
.01347 
.01.520 
.01414 
.01755 
.01096 
.01584 
.01383 
.01523 
.01521 
.01584 
.01596 
.01662 
.01^30 
.01318 
.01892 
.01624 
.01357 
.01256 

. 01520 



0.000816 
.000907 
.000772 
.000812 
.000818 
.000854 
.000873 
.000790 
.000807 
.000858 
.000899 
.000832 
.000980 
. 001076 
.000834 
.000835 
.000894 
. 001060 
.000814 
.000t-;57 
.0008.53 
.001005 
. 000866 
. 0(K)S20 
.OOOSSS 
.001043 
. 000820 
.000791 
.001038 
. 0OOS(.9 
.000939 
.000937 
.000789 
.000851 
.000914 
.000917 
. 000836 
. 0007S3 
.000900 
. 000624 
.000975 
.000763 
.000937 
.000970 
.000975 
. 000784 
.000902 
.000928 
.0008.59 
.000930 
. 000805 
.000808 
.000787 
.0009.58 
. 000839 
.000894 
.000785 
.000780 
.000781 
.000832 
.000920 
.000723 
.000845 
.000990 
. 000887 
. 000872 
.000714 
.000732 
.000900 
.000811 
.00084-8 
.000736 

.000874 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



55 



Table 4. — Analyses of spikes of ufheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of Tceri 

Crop of 1902 — Continued. 

3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 







Weight ( 


in grams) 






Percent- 


Proteid 


nitrogen 


Record 


Number 
of ker- 


of— 


Volume 
of aver- 


Specific 

gravity 


age of 
proteid 


(gram) m— 1 


nels on 

row of 

spikelets. 










number. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


age ker- 
nel. 


of ker- 
nels. 


nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


174 

177 

179 


18 
19 
19 
17 
20 
21 
15 


0.4025 
.4073 
.4972 
.5262 
.5512 
. .5414 
.4015 


0.0223 
.0214 
.0261 
.0309 
.0275 
.0257 
.0267 






3.76 
3.57 
3.85 
3.58 
3.78 
3.97 
3.90 


0.01513 
.01454 
.01914 
.01884 
. 02084 
.02149 
. 0156(i 


0.000838 
. 000764 
.001005 
.001110 
. 001040 
.001020 
.001043 










180 

184 

186 

204 














0.0198 


1.3460 


209 


17 


.3588 


.0211 


.0164 


1.2828 


3.82 


.01371 


. 000806 


215 


12 


.3318 


.0276 


.0205 


1.3493 


3.79 


.012.58 


.(X)1046 


224 


17 


.4891 


.0287 


.0220 


1. 3039 


3.65 


.017&5 


.(K)1048 


225 


19 

18 


.4976 
. 4555 


.0261 
.02.53 


.0193 
.0192 


1.. 3.507 

1.3164 


3.55 
3.65 


.01766 
. 01663 


.000927 
. 000923 


235 


240 


16 


.3984 


.0249 


.0177 


1.4025 


3.. 53 


. 01406 


. 000S79 


245 


15 


.3971 


.0264 


.0200 


1 . 3230 


3.64 


.01445 


.000961 


246 


IS 


. 4562 


.0253 


.0194 


1.3058 


3.75 


.01711 


. 000949 


247 


18 


.4937 


.0274 


.0202 


1.3561 


3.50 


.01728 


. 000959 


248 


17 


.4617 


.0271 


.0193 


1.4095 


3.65 


.01685 


. 000991 


253 


21 


.5960 


.0283 


.0203 


1.3917 


3.63 


.02163 


.(X)1327 


259 


19 


. 4932 


.0259 


.0193 


1.3400 


3.84 


.01894 


.000995 


261 


17 


.5195 


.0305 


.0229 


1.3333 


3. .50 


.01818 


.001068 


274 


15 


.3347 


.0223 


.0168 


1.3300 


3.57 


.01195 


.000796 


279 


16 


.4304 


.0269 


.0200 


1.3441 


3.79 


.01631 


.001020 


280 


• 16 


.4305 


.0269 


.0198 


1..3600 


3.70 


.01593 


.(X)0995 


283 


17 


.4974 


.0292 


.0210 


1.3911 


3.86 


.01920 


.001127 


284 


14 


.3723 


.0265 


.0189 


1.4050 


3.72 


.01385 


.000986 


285 


18 


. 5769 


.0320 


.0233 


1.3715 


3.87 


.02233 


.001238 


286 


17 


.4140 


.0243 


.0178 


1.3660 


3.. 56 


.01474 


.000865 


287 


16 


.4740 


.0296 


.0223 


1.3270 


3.87 


. 01835 


.001146 


290 


16 


.3955 


.0247 


.0177 


1.3921 


4.00 


.01.582 


.000988 


296 


17 


..5037 


.0296 


.0214 


1.3832 


3.94 


.01985 


.001166 


299 


17 


.4553 


.0267 


.0195 


1.3715 


3.68 


.01676 


.000983 


309 


18 


.4753 


.0239 


.0239 


1.1051 


3.75 


.01782 


.000990 


313 


17 


.4798 


.0282 


.0202 


1.3971 


3.52 


.01689 


. 000993 


328 


20 


.5795 


.0289 


. 0215 


1.3466 


3.61 


.02092 


.001043 


363 


17 


.3795 


.0223 


.0165 


1.3499 


3. .50 


.01328 


. 000781 


365 


16 


.3469 


.0216 


.0169 


1.2787 


3.50 


.01214 


.(KX)7.56 


384 


14 


.4012 


.0286 


.0212 


1.3499 


3.56 


.01428 


.001020 


385 


15 


.4162 


.0277 


.0203 


1.3670 


3.79 


.01578 


.0010.50 


405 


18 


.4940 


.0274 


.0203 


1.3.508 


3.76 


.01857 


.001030 


407 


20 


.4707 


.0235 


.0171 


1.3700 


3.79 


.01784 


.000891 


408 

409 

412 

413 

417 

420 

422 

435 

446 

Average . . 


19 
17 
16 
17 
19 
17 
23 
20 
17 


. 4462 
.4329 
..3390 
.4393 
.4530 
. 41,56 
.5395 
.4310 
.4425 


.0234 
.0254 
.0211 
.0258 
.0238 
.0244 
.0234 
.0215 
.0260 






3.64 
3.. 59 
3.63 
3.77 
3.80 
3.73 
3.53 
3.53 
3.75 


.01624 
.015.54 
.01231 
.01656 
.01721 
. 01550 
.01904 
.01521 
.01659 


.000852 
.000912 
. 00)766 
. (X)0973 
. 000904 
.000910 
.00OS26 
. 000759 
. 000975 






































17.3 


.4517 


.0257 


.01987 


1.3494 


3.70 


.01672 


.000982 



Table 5 shows at a glance the averages for each of the classes of 
spikes just tabulated, and permits of a comparison of the average 
figures for each class. ^' 

« The determinations of specific gravity were made by the following method, devised by 
Prof. S. Avery: A light basket of wire gauze was suspended by a hair from the hook that 
supported one of the pan hangers of th.e balance. The basket was allowed to hang in a 
beaker of benzol supported by a shelf above the pan. By using a counterpoise the balance 
was now brought to the zero point. The balance was kept at zero by the occasional adjust- 
ment of a rider on the left arm of the beam. The wheat was weighed on the pan of the 
balance, then transfej-red to the basket and weighed in benzol, and the temperature of the 
latter carefully noted. The specific gravity was calculated from the well-known formula: 
Wt. in air X sp- gr. in benzol at T" _ ^ ^ . 
Wt. in air — wt. in benzol 



56 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 5. — Summary of analyses of spikes of irheat, arranged according to nitrogen content 

of kernels. Crop of 1902. 



Range rf 


Per- 
centage 
of pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 


Number of— 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Volume 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


Specific 
gravity. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


percentage of 

proteid 

nitrogen. 


Analy- 
ses. 


Kernels 
on row 
of spike- 
lets. 


Kemelsr 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


2 to 2.5 

2.5to3 

3 to 3 5 


2.32 
2.76 
3.23 
3.70 


18 
82 
107 
49 


17 
17.1 
17.4 
17.3 


0.4759 
.4791 
.4724 

.4715 


0.0266 
.0279 
.0270 
.0257 


0.0209 
.0207 
.0199 
.0199 


1.374 
1.368 
1.367 
1.349 


0.01141 
.01332 
.01520 
.01672 


0.000643 
.000776 
.000874 


3.5 to4 


.000982 



From this table it will be seen that with an increase in the percent- 
age of proteid nitrogen the number of kernels on a row^ of spikelets 
remains about constant; that in general there were a decrease in the 
weight of the kernels on a row of spikelets and a slight decrease in the 
weight of the average kernel; and that the volume of the average 
kernel decreased, as did the specific gravity. 

It may safely be stated that a high percentage of proteid nitrogen 
was in these spikes associated with a kernel of low^ specific gravity, 
light weight, and small relative volume, and, as the spikes were 
selected for their ripeness and healthy appearance, this relation can 
not be attributed to immaturity or disease. 

The table last referred to shows a decrease in the weight of the 
kernels on the spike as the percentage of proteid nitrogen increases; 
but it also shows that in spite of the decrease in the w^eight of the 
kernels there is an increase in the actual amount of proteid nitrogen 
they contain, and that the same is true of the average kernel. 

Table 6 gives a summary of the same analyses, arranged according 
to the specific gravities of the kernels. All spikes whose kernels had 
a specific gravity below 1.30 are grouped in one class, those having a 
specific gravity of 1.30 to 1.33 in another class, and so on until finally 
all spikes having a specific gravity of more than 1.42 form the last 
class. 

Table 6. — Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to specific gravities 

of kernels. Crop of 1902. 





Specific 
gravity 
of ker- 
nels. 


Number cf— 


Weight 

of kernels 

(gram). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
Jiitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Range of specific 
gravity. 


Analy- 
ses. 


Kernels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Below 1 30 


1.2,55 
1.315 
1.347 
1.375 
1.399 
1.463 


8 
17 
50 

71 

40 

8 


16.7 
16.5 
17.3 
17.2 
16.7 
19.1 


0. 3887 
.4315 
.4008 
.4794 

.4848 
.5287 


3.29 
3.35 
2.91 
3.06 
3.03 
3.07 


0. 02331 
.02617 


0.01280 
.01446 


0. 0007662 


1 30 to 1 33 .... 


. 0008762 


1 33 to 1 36 


.02.366 1 .01508 
.02786 .01462 


. 0008756 


1 36 to 1 39 


.0008559 


1 39 to 1 42 


.02899 1 .01459 '• .0008729 


1.42 and over 


. 02773 


.01605 


. 0008371 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



57 



This table shows no constant rekition between the specific gravity 
and the number of kernels on the spike. With an increase in the 
specific gravity there is an increase in the weight of the kernels on the 
spike, and with some exceptions an increase in the weight of the 
average kernel. As the specific gravity increases, the percentage of 
proteid nitrogen decreases, which agrees with the previous table. 
The grams of proteid nitrogen in the kernels on the s})ikes and in the 
average kernel increase with the specific gravity. 

Table 7 shows the summary of the same analyses, arranged accord- 
ing to the weight of the average kernel. Spikes whose kernels have 
an average weight of less than 0.024 gram form the first class, and 
each succeeding class increases b}^ 0.002 gram. 

Table 7. — Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to iceight of average 

kernel. Crop of 1902. 



Range of weight of 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Number of— 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels 
(gram). 


Specifie 
gravity 
of ker- 
nels . 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in- 


average kernel 
(gram) . 


Analy- 
ses. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels. 


Below 0.024 

0.024 to 0.026 

0.026 to 0.028 

0.028 to 0.030 

0.030 to 0.032 

0.032 and over 


0.02214 
. 02528 
.02705 
.02896 
.03089 
.03324 


27 
38 
48 
40 
26 
19 


16.9 
17.5 
17.0 
17.0 
17.0 
16.8 


0.3812 
.4425 
.4609 
.4916 
..5274 
.5588 


1.341 
1.361 
1.360 
1.372 
1.388 
1.373 


3.197 
3.28 
3.22 
3.11 

2.86 
2.88 


0. 0007184 
.0008294 
.0008711 
.0009090 
.0008787 
.0009594 


0.01215 
.01438 
.01475 
.01.546 
.01.506 
. 01617 



There seems to be no relation between the weight of the average 
kernel and the number of kernels on the spike. The w^eight of all 
the kernels on the spike naturally increases with the w^eight of the 
average kernel. The specific gravity of the kernels increases with 
the weight of the average kernel. The percentage of proteid nitrogen 
decreases with an increase in the weight of the average kernel, in 
which respect it agrees with the two previous tables. The grams of 
proteid nitrogen in the average kernel and the total proteid nitrogen 
in the spike increase with the w^eight of the average kernel. 

Samples from each of the spikes of wheat from which these data 
were derived were planted, together with samples from other spikes, 
all of which have been analyzed, aggregating 800 in all. Each kernel 
was planted separately at a distance of 6 inches each w-ay from every 
other kernel. The kernels from each spike were marked by a stake 
bearing the record number of the spike. 

During the winter a considerable number of plants were killed, so 
that the stand was irregular in the spring. In some cases all of the 
plants resulting from a spike of the previous year were killed, and in 
other cases only a portion of such plants. The result w^as a some- 
what uneven stand, which doubtless gave certain plants an advantage 
over others in growth and yield. 



58 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

When the crop was ripe m 1903 each plant was harvested sepa- 
rately, and all of those resulting from spikes wliich the previous year 
had shown a proteid nitrogen content of more than 4 per cent or less 
than 2 per cent were analyzed, as were also a certain number resulting 
from spikes of intermediate values. 

The good kernels on each plant were counted and weighed, thus 
giving a record of the yield of each plant. From these data the 
average weight of the kernels per plant was calculated. The specific 
gravity was not determined and consequently the average volume of 
the kernels on each plant was not calculated, as was done the previous 
year. 

In Table 8 the plants harvested in 190.3 are arranged in classes of 
1 to 2 per cent proteid nitrogen, 2 to 2.5 per cent, 2.5 to 3 per cent, 
3 to 3.5 per cent, 3.5 to 4 per cent, 4 to 4.5 per cent, and over 4.5 per 
cent. The number and weight of the kernels on each plant are stated, 
as is also the average weight of each kernel. The number of grams 
of proteid nitrogen in all the kernels of the plant is shown, and also 
the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the average kernel on each 
plant. Table 9 shows the average for each class. 

These results, so far as they cover the same ground as those of the 
previous year, have the same significance. The}^ show a quite uniform 
although slight decrease in the weight of the average kernel accom- 
panying an increase in the percentage of proteid nitrogen, and a very 
marked increase in the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
average kernel. Especially marked is the increase in the amount of 
proteid nitrogen in the average kernel, amounting to 28 per cent of 
the weight of the kernel for every 1 per cent increase in the content 
of proteid nitrogen. 

One column of this table, not contained in that compiled from 
results of the previous year, shows the number of grams of proteid 
nitrogen contained in all of the kernels on the plant: or, in other 
words, the proteid nitrogen production of the plant. This appears, 
on the whole, to increase with the percentage of proteid nitrogen, 
although the results are not sufficiently consistent to permit of an 
unqualified statement to that effect. The uneven stand of the plants, 
before referred to, doubtless accounts for these inconsistent results. 

Two other columns contain data not obtained in 1902. The fu"st 
of these shows the number of kernels per plant, which apparently 
decreases slightly as the percentage of proteid nitrogen increases, but 
this can not be stated unqualifiedly. The next column shows the 
weight of kernels per plant, or the yield per plant, which likewise 
seems to decrease slightly with an increase in the percentage of pro- 
teid nitrogen. 



SOME PROPEKTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



59 



Table S. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of prof e id nitrogen. Crop of 

J 903.^ 

1 TO 2 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



Percent- 
Record num- ^^^^^1^ 

' nitrogen 
in kernels. 


Mnmhpr 1 Weight (in grams) of- Total pro- Proteid 
of leer ' ' teidnitro- nitrogen in 

nels per 1 Kernels Average , ^f.'^ii^^" average ker- 
Plan^t. per plant. kernl , ^^^^^ ^^n^^^_ 


.32206 

32605 


1.81 
1.20 
1.62 
1.39 
1.61 
1.46 
1.91 
1.84 
1.50 
1.34 
1.89 
1.69 
1.98 
1.73 
1.88 
1.87 
1.90 
1.66 
1.89 
1.98 
1.81 


507 
225 
305 

77 
508 

25 
220 
124 
718 
862 
342 
577 

41 
736 

95 

35 
208 
558 
543 • 
216 
729 
465 
396 

53 

64 

56 
125 
159 


10.4036 
5.2268 
7.0889 
1.1132 

11.1476 

.3161 

4.0358 

1.5298 

11.2890 

15.5935 

5.6864 

9.8378 

.8328 

16.4433 

1.9469 

.59.52 

4.0230 

12.0136 
9.3629 
4. 4222 

15.7835 
9.7922 
9.1411 
.8983 
1.2117 
.7319 
2.3678 
2. 8356 


0.02052 
.02323 
.02271 
.01446 
.02194 
.01264 
.01834 
.01234 
.01572 
.01804 
.01663 
.01705 
.02031 
.02234 
.02049 
.01701 
.01934 
.02153 
.01724 
.02047 
.02165 
.02106 
.02308 
. 01695 
.01893 
.01307 
.01894 
.01783 


0.18831 ] 0.0003714 
.06272 .0002788 
.11223 1 .0003679 
. 01547 . 0002009 
. 17948 ! nf¥)SnS:< 


.33407 

33408 

33905 


42206 

45606 

45805 

48407 

51005 

55307 

57308 

57405 

57607 

58806 

60605 

63505 

69806 

72606 

74305 

80305 


.00462 
.07708 
.02815 
. 16933 
.20881 
. 10747 
. 16626 
.01649 
.24847 
.03660 
.01113 
.07644 
. 19943 
. 18538 
.08756 
.28569 
.19388 
. 17550 
.01491 
.01999 
.01427 
.04641 
.05132 


.0001846 
.0003.504 
.0002700 
.0002358 
. 0002422 
.0003142 
.0002881 
.0004022 
.0003865 
.0003853 
.0003180 
.0003674 
.0003574 
.0003414 
.0004054 
.0003919 
.0004170 
.0004432 
.0002814 
.0003124 
.0002549 
.0003713 
.0003228 


81705 

81710 

92407 

94205 

94605 

94908 

95510 


1.98 
1.92 
1.66 
1.65 
1.95 
1.96 
1.81 


Average . . 


1.749 320.3 i 6.23823 


.01871 .10655 


.00032914 



2 TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17405 
17408 
18805 
21212 
21705 
21707 
21708 
21709 
21912 
27205 
27206 
27306 
27505 
33107 
33405 
33605 
33606 
34208 
37706 
37906 
39205 
39606 
44607, 
48106 
48409 
55305 
55306 
55608. 
55908. 
55909 
56206. 
56207. 
57307. 
57508. 
58905. 
59605. 
59606. 
63107. 



2.13 
2.18 
2.02 
2.16 
2.45 
2.19 
2.33 
2.47 
2.31 
2.41 
2.36 
2.47 
2.12 
2.35 
2.03 
2.39 
2.21 
2.13 
2.34 
2.44 
2.11 
2.37 
2.44 
2.38 
2.02 
2.48 
2.18 
2.31 
2.42 
2.30 
2.42 
2.34 
2.43 
2.21 
2.43 
2.12 
2.16 
2.43 



738 
497 
137 
84 
58 
582 
390 
361 
510 
891 
777 
684 
539 
318 
421 
301 
382 
156 
.56 
19 
1,031 
346 
101 
608 
314 
167 
214 
837 
562 
302 
509 
462 
261 
380 
170 
382 
567 
417 



15. 6996 

9. 2038 

2. 1462 

1.7216 

1.5420 

12.3685 

9. 2850 

7. 7296 

9. 7236 

16. 4061 

19. 18.54 

13.3011 

12. 0399 

6. 1026 

8. 1268 

7. 0.596 

8.1890 

2. 9886 

1.2069 

.2063 

21.5399 

4.6383 

1.8246 

11.6655 

6. 4302 

2. 5160 

4. 1323 

22. 5848 

12.2210 

9. 2120 

9. 3093 

10.9073 

4.7117 

12. 0728 

2. .3031 

7. 1828 

9. 7084 

9.3120 



0.02127 
. 01852 
.01.567 
. 020.50 
. 02659 
. 02125 
.02381 
.02141 
. 01907 
.01841 
.02469 
.01945 
.02183 
.01919 
. 01930 
.02345 
.02144 
.01916 
.021.55 
.01086 
.02089 
.01.341 
.01806 
.01919 
.02048 
.01.507 
.01931 
.02699 
.02175 
.030.50 
.01829 
. 02.361 
.01801 
.03177 
. 01355 
.01880 
.01712 
. 02233 



0. 3.3441 
.20065 
. 04335 
.03718 
.03778 
. 27086 
. 21634 
. 19092 
. 22461 
. 39.539 
. 45276 
. 32853 
. 24942 
. 14341 
. 16498 
. 16872 
. 18098 
.06366 
. 02824 
.00.503 
. 45435 
. 10967 
.044.52 
. 27765 
. 12989 
. 06240 
.09008 
. 52194 
. 29575 
.21187 
. 22529 
. 25522 
.11445 
. 26680 
.05.596 
. 15228 
.20970 
.22628 



0. 0004531 
. 0004037 
. 0003164 
. 0004427 
.0006514 
. 0004654 
. 0005547 
.0005289 
.0004404 
.0004437 
. 0005827 
. 0004803 
.0004627 
. 0004510 
.0003919 
. 0005605 
.00047.38 
.0004081 
. 0005053 
. 0002649 
. 0004407 
.0003177 
. 0004408 
. 0004567 
.0004137 
.0003736 
.0004210 
. 0006236 
.0005262 
.0007016 
. 0004426 
.0005524 
. 0004387 
.0007021 
. 000.3292 
.0003986 
.0003698 
.0005426 



60 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 8. — Analyses of plants, arranged accordinq to percentage of proteid nitrogen. 

of ims— Continued. 

2 TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Crop 



Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in kernels. 


Number 


Weight (in grams) of^ 


Total pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in all 
kernels 
(gram). 


Proteid 
nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 

(gram). 


of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


63506 

65306 

6.5307 

65308 

69505 


2.44 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
2.29 
2.47 
2.13 
2.27 
2.48 
2.45 
2.39 
2.30 
2.35 
2.34 
2.41 
2.28 
2.48 
2.32 
2.47 
2.42 
2. .30 
2.49 
2.47 
2.07 
2. .35 
2.48 
2.47 


153 
544 
373 
583 
225 
1,260 
372 
398 
167 
414 

25 
464 
498 
786 
287 
757 
428 

37 

74 
470 
315 
190 
549 
419 
286 
138 

52 


2.3986 
9. 8298 
7.0051 

11.7066 
4.7116 

28.2136 
9. 1522 
9.0386 
2. 6462 
8.5373 
.5572 
9. 6451 
8. 4407 

18. 3614 
7.3993 

16.4692 
8. 7448 
.7130 
1.. 5.355 
9.8719 
5. 7131 
3. 6006 

10. .5556 
6. 7664 
4. 4423 
2. 9475 
.7577 


.01568 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.01847 
. 02239 
.02191 
. 02270 
.01585 
. 02062 
.02229 
. 02079 
. 01695 
. 02336 
.02578 
.02175 
.02043 
. 01927 
.02075 
.02100 
.01814 
.01895 
■.01923 
.01615 
.01.553 
.02136 
.01457 


0.05853 
.23690 
.15971 
.24468 
. 10790 
. 69688 
. 199.36 
. 20518 
.06563 
. 20918 
. 01332 
. 22184 
. 19836 
.42965 
. 17833 
.37548 
.21687 
.01654 
.03793 
. 23890 
.1.3140 
. 08965 
. 26073 
. 14007 
10439 


0.0003825 
.0004355 
. 0004282 
. 0004197 
.0004231 
.0005.531 
. 0004668 
. 0005154 
. 0003930 
. 000.5052 
. (X)05327 
.0004781 
. 0003983 
.0005466 
.0006213 " 
.0004960 
. 0005067 
. 0004471 
. 0005125 
. 0005082 
.0004171 
.0004719 
.0004749 
.000.3343 


71905 

72705 

72708 

72905 

73306 

73307 

74606 

76205 

81707 

81708 

81709 

84405 

84905 

88608 

88609 

92409 

94209 

94406 

94407 

94905 


95509 

95707 

Average 


.07310 .000.5297 
.01872 .0003599 


2.319 


396.8 


8.2.502 .020113 


.190316 .0004660 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17409. . . 
17410... 
20706. . . 
20707... 
20708... 
20710... 
21207... 
21305... 
21306... 
21710... 
21711... 
21805... 
21806... 
21807... 
21808... 
21809. . . 
21810... 
21905... 
22205... 
22207... 
25205... 
25206. . . 
26106... 
26805... 
26806... 
26807... 
26905... 
26906... 
26907. . . 
26908. . . 
26909. . . 
27005. . . 
27207... 
27305. . . 
27307. . . 
27506. . . 
27508. . . 
27o09. . . 
28805... 
32606... 



2.77 
2.58 
2.83 
2.96 
2.67 
2.90 
2. .59 
2.71 
2.69 
2.71 
2.73 
2.57 
2.73 
2.69 
2.64 
2.81 
2.77 
2.71 
2.76 
2.63 
2.81 
2.60 
2.80 
2.76 
2.71 
2.61 
2.96 
2.80 
2.63 
2.92 
2. .58 
2.53 
2.70 
2.64 
2.90 
2.91 



744 
163 
444 
122 
867 
118 
312 
226 

59 
873 
1,232 
599 
377 
1,156 
418 

.52 
791 
283 
169 
522 
205 

90 
220 
1.52 
721 
326 
228 
102 
192 
180 
866 
166 
267 
167 
444 
251 
243 

87 

94 



14. 8957 

16. 9987 
3. 3138 
9. 9070 
2. 4690 

17. 1115 
2.3066 
6. 2514 
4. 1516 
.8478 

17. 1820 

20. 9290 

14. 2450 
9.4172 

19. 7446 
8. 0214 
1.0304 

14.3111 
2. 6965 
3. 2787 

10. 7836 
4. 67,54 
2. 0737 
4. 94.56 
2. 7255 

17.2324 
6.4102 
4. 2376 
1.8276 
3.9797 
2. 9999 

16.4120 
3. 3266 
5. 5666 
3.0850 

10. 0005 
5. .5324 
5.3615 
2. 1851 
2. 0162 



0. 01857 
.02285 
.02033 
. 02282 
.02024 
. 01974 
.019.55 
.02004 
.01837 
.01437 
. 01968 
.01699 
. 02378 
. 02498 
.01708 
.01919 
. 01982 
. 01809 
. 00953 
.01940 
. 02066 
. 02281 
. 02304 
.02248 
.01793 
.02390 
.01966 
.01859 
.01792 
.02073 
.01667 
.01895 
.02004 
.02085 
.01847 
.022.52 
.02287 
. 02206 
.02512 
.02145 



0.40964 
.48957 
.09212 
. 27443 
.06.399 
. 48428 
. 06804 
. 16691 
. 12039 
.02196 
. 46.563 
. 56299 
. 38604 
. 25709 
. 50744 
.21898 
.02772 
. 37781 
. 07577 
.09082 
. 28560 
. 12904 
. 05454 
. 13897 
.07086 
. 482.50 
.17692 
.11484 
. 04995 
.11780 
. 08400 
.43164 
.00712 
. 14,362 
. 07805 
. 27003 
. 14608 
. 1,5549 
. 063.59 
.05807 



0. 0005108 
. 0006.580 
. 0005652 
.0006181 
. 0005221 
. 0005586 
. 0005766 
. 0005350 
. 0005327 
. 0003722 
. 0005334 
. 0004569 
. 0006444 
.0006664 
. 0004389 
. 0005238 
. 0005330 
. 0004777 
.0002677 
.0005374 
. 0005.599 
. 0006295 
. 0006060 
.0006317 
. 0004662 
. 0006692 
. 0005427 
. 0005037 
.0004677 
.0006135 
.0004667 
. 0004984 
. 0005850 
. 0005379 
. 0004674 
. 0006082 
. 0006037 
. 0006399 
.0007.309 
.0006177 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



61 



TabLe H.— Analyses of plants, anaru/ed accordinq to percentage of proteid nitrof/en. Crop 

0/ 7905— Continued. 

2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 





Percent- 


1 
Number ; 


Weight (La 


grams) of— 


Total pro- 


Proteid 




age of 

proteid 

nitrogen 

in kernels. 






teid nitro- 
gen in all 
kernels 
(gram). 


nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 
(prram). 


Record num- 
ber. 


of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


33105 


2.91 


132 


2.5601 


0.01939 


0. 07450 i 


0. 0005644 


33106 


2.94 


18 1 


.3089 


.01716 


.00908 


. 000.5045 


3340G 


2.87 


283 


4.6045 


.01627 


. 13215 


.0004670 


33900 


2.81 


119 


2.2862 


.01921 


.05424 


.0005399 


34205 


2.73 


464 


9. 1498 


.01972 


. 24979 


.000.5383 


34207 


2.84 


611 


13.5556 


.02219 


. 38.505 


.0006273 


37305 


2.96 


309 


6. 1394 


.01987 


.18173 


. 0005881 


37705 


2.64 


461 


8.0905 


.01972 


.23998 


.000.5327 


37707 


2.94 


193 


3.3004 


.01710 


. 09670 


.0005010 


37905 


2.53 


37 


.9452 


. 02555 


. 02391 


.0006463 


38005 


2.84 


139 


2.5134 


.01808 


.07138 


. 0005135 


38506 


2.89 


85 


1.6799 


.01975 


.048.55 


.000.5712 


38606 


2.63 


401 


8.4605 


.02110 


.22251 


.000.5549 


38608 


2.82 


158 


3.0228 


.01913 


.08.522 


.0005394 


38609 


2.74 


293 


6. 7665 


.02309 


. 18.540 


. 0006475 


38706 


2. .59 


365 


7.2.545 


.01988 


. 18780 


. 0005148 


39405 


2.88 
2.93 


447 1 
67 ! 


9.3541 
1.9218 


.02093 
.02869 


.21399 
. 05631 


. 0006027 
.0008404 


39506 


40505 


2.82 


170 1 


4. 1546 


.02444 


.11716 


.0006892 


43405 


2. 92 


124 


2.8000 


.022.58 


.08176 


.0006594 


44.505 


2.94 


340 


5.9990 


.01764 


. 17637 


.0005187 


44605 


2.86 


55 


1. 1271 


.02049 


.03223 


.0005861 


44606 


2.90 


124 


2. 5235 


.02035 


.07318 


.0005902 


45605 


2.82 


61 


.7081 


.01161 


.01997 


.0003273 


46106 


2.54 


82 


1.6103 


.01964 


. 04090 


.0004988 


46107 


2.54 


478 


8.3935 


.017.56 


.21319 


. 0004460 


48305 


2.87 


473 


12.0278 


. 02543 


.34524 


.0007299 


48408 


2.81 


27 


.3485 


.01291 


.00979 


.0003627 


48507 


2.64 


70 


1.6036 


. 02296 


.04233 


.OOO0O62 


48.508 


2.76 


603 


11.2008 


.018.58 


.30986 


.0005127 


48806 


2.70 


547 


9.8346 


.01798 


. 26553 


. 0004877 


50706 


2.80 


35 


.4701 


.01343 


.01316 


. 0003761 


55008 


2.60 


944 


17.4226 


.01846 


. 45299 


.0004799 


55206 


2.. 56 


578 


11.3592 


.01965 


. 29079 


. 0005031 


55308 


2.54 


397 


9.. 5078 


.02395 


.241.50 


. 0006225 


55506 


2.80 


866 


17.8.506 


.02062 


.49995 


. 0005773 


55507 


2.63 


504 


9.8228 


.01949 


.25834 


.0005126 


.55605 


2.64 
2. .58 


500 
503 


10.9180 
11.0930 


.021S4 
.02205 


.28823 

.28.580 


.0005765 
.000.5690 


55606 


.55607 


2.69 


138 


2.3931 


.01734 


.06437 


.0004665 


55905 


2.67 
2.81 


331 
499 


5.7948 
7.9968 


.01751 
.01603 


.15170 
.22471 


.0004674 
.0004.503 


55906 


55907 


2.59 


749 


19. 3966 


. 02.590 


..50238 


.0006707 


56105 


2.73 


336 


5. 7431 


.01709 


. 15ii79 


. 0004667 


56106 


2.57 


644 


12.0161 


. 01866 


. 30881 


. 0004795 


56107 


2.96 


872 


14.4556 


.016.58 


.42790 


.0004907 


56205 


2.51 


333 


6., 5232 


.019.59 


. 16373 


.0004917 


56208 


2.61 


563 


13.5720 


. 02356 


.3461ti 


.0006149 


56209 


2. .59 


950 


15. 8086 


.01664 


. 40945 


.0004310 


57005 


2.71 


88 


1 . .5364 


.01746 


.04164 


.0004731 


57006 


2.76 


701 


10. 1836 


.014.53 


.28107 


.0004010 


57007 


2.65 


168 


3.3176 


.01975 


. 08792 


. 0005233 


57105 


2.76 


407 


3. 7263 


.00916 


. 10285 


.0002527 


57306 


2.86 


434 


7.9772 


.01838 


.22815 


.000.5257 


57406 


2.75 


135 


2.4923 


.01846 


.06854 


.0005077 


57407 


2.62 


762 


14.9992 


.01968 


. 39297 


.0005157 


57408 


2.61 


596 


12. 2004 


.02047 


.31842 


.000.5343 


57506 


2.80 


180 


2.7616 


.01.534 


.07733 


.0004296 


57507 


2.85 


359 


6.9861 


. 01946 


. 19905 


.0005545 


57509 


2. .54 


611 


10. 6261 


.01739 


. 26990 


.0004417 


57606 


2.74 


132 


3.0790 


.02333 


. 08436 


.0006391 


57608 


2.64 


438 


8.6189 


.01968 


. 22756 


.0005195 


57805 


2.87 


270 


4.8988 


.01814 


. 14060 


.0005207 


58206 


2.67 


148 


1.3961 


.00943 


.0.3728 


.0002519 


58505 


2.95 


273 


7.4516 


.02730 


.21982 


.0008052 


.58805 


2.74 


1,158 


23. 1471 


.01999 


.63422 


.000.5464 


63106 


2.79 


165 


3.3006 


.02001 


.09208 


. 000.5581 


66005 


2.63 


370 


7.6690 


. 02073 


.20170 


.000.5451 


69.506 


2.50 


663 


13. 5696 


.02047 


.3.3923 


.0005117 


69705 


2.50 


244 


3. 7810 


.01550 


. 09453 


.0003874 


72406 


2.95 


430 


8.2929 


.01929 


.24464 


.000.5689 


73308 


2.92 


624 


14. 2986 


.02291 


.41752 


.0006.539 


74506 


2.73 


23 


.4096 


.01781 


.01118 


.0004862 


74508 


2.60 


57 


.8172 


.01434 


.0212.5 


.0003728 


74605 


2.60 


399 


7.1181 


.01784 


. 18507 


.0004638 



62 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 8. — Analyses of pla7Us, arvanqed according to percentage of proteid nitroqen. Crop of 

iPOJ— Continued. 

2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 

proteid 
nitrogen 
in kernels. 


Number 
of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Weight (in 


grams) of— 


Total pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in all 
kernels 
(gram) . 


Proteid 
nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 

(gram). 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel 


74607 


2.56 


491 


8. 3406 


0.01699 


0.21352 


0. 0004349 


81405 


2.62 


240 


4.5737 


.01862 


.11710 


.0004879 


81.505 


2.94 


146 


2. 8327 


.01940 


.08328 


.0005704 


81706 


2.71 


722 


15.3928 


.02132 


.41715 


.000.5778 


85205 


2.60 


214 


3.4766 


.01625 


.09039 


.0004224 


8.5206 


2.66 


376 


4.9315 


.01312 


.13118 


.0003332 


86105 


2.56 
2.63 


203 
436 


3. 0282 
7.6241 


.01495 
.01749 


.07964 
.20052 


.0003923 
.0004599 


86106 


88605 


2.80 
2. .53 


69 

481 


1.6362 
9.9456 


.02731 
. 02068 


.04.581 
. 25162 


. 0007640 
.0005231 


88606 


88607 


2.61 


234 


5.1584 


.02205 


. 13463 


.000.5754 


88905 


2.83 


293 


5.3069 


.01811 


. 15019 


.0005126 


88906 


2.65 


546 


9.9034 


.01814 


.26245 


.0004807 


91906 


2.81 


200 


3.5486 


.01774 


.09972 


.0004986 


92205 


2.74 


345 


5.2616 


.01.525 


.14417 


.0004179 


92206 


2.67 


46 


1.1074 


. 02407 


.02957 


.0006428 


92207 


2.55 


209 


3. 6926 


.01767 


.09416 


.0004.505 


92208 


2.72 


353 


6.6206 


.01876 


.18008 


.0005102 


92305 


2.93 


160 


2. 3859 


.01491 


.06991 


.0004369 


92408 


2.97 


207 


3.7820 


.01827 


.11233 


.0005426 


92507 


2.58 


505 


9.6779 


.01916 


.24969 


.0004944 


94206 


2.78 


402 


7.5006 


.01866 


.20851 


.0005187 


94207 


2.86 


718 


13.70.57 


.01909 


. 39199 


.0005460 


94907 


2.94 


626 


12. 1918 


.01948 


.3.5844 


.0005726 


95505 


2.81 


37 


.3146 


.00850 


.00884 


. 0002389 


95506 


2.74 


597 


11.0548 


.01852 


.30291 


. 000.5074 


95507 


2.59 


571 


12. 1592 


.02030 


. 31492 


.0005515 


95508 


2.56 


740 


14.4617 


. 01954 


. 37023 


.0005003 


9.5705 


2.54 


636 


10. 3426 


. 01626 


.26270 


.0004131 


95706 

Average 


2.73 


267 


5.1629 


.01934 


. 14095 


.0005279 


2.731 


370. 36 


7. 1755 


.019354 


. 194423 


.00052706 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17305 


3.03 


183 


3.6302 


0.01984 


0. 10999 


0.0006010 


17306 


3.09 


243 


3.9968 


.01645 


. 12350 


.000,5082 


17307 


3.46 


138 


3. 1454 


.02280 


. 10883 


.0007886 


17308 


3.25 


61 


1.2275 


.02012 


.03994 


.0006.540 


17406 


3.29 


124 


2.0907 


.01683 


.06878 


.0005547 


18906 


3.48 


65 


.9229 


.01420 


.03212 


.0004941 


20705 


3.09 


109 


1.8517 


.01698 


.05722 


.000,5249 


20709 


3.05 


258 


5.3229 


.02063 


.16235 


. 0006292 


20805 


3.32 


697 


14. 6942 


.021.57 


.48784 


. 0006999 


21205 


3.16 


123 


2.3642 


.01922 


.07471 


.0006074 


21208 


3.24 


287 


5. 1594 


.01798 


.16712 


.0005824 


21211 


3.15 


10 


.2806 


.02806 


.00884 


.0008839 


21307 


3.04 


143 


2. 5691 


.01796 


.0''810 


.0005461 


21308 


3.45 


354 


5.8080 


.01641 


.20038 


.0005660 


21906 


3.18 


408 


10. 4800 


.02563 


.33403 


.0008168 


21907 


3.35 


158 


2. 9248 


.01851 


.09~98 


.0006201 


21913 


3.01 


492 


10. 1925 


.02072 


.30680 


.0006235 


22206 


3.22 


146 


2.5712 


.01720 


.08086 


.000,5,538 


22208 


3.18 


118 


1.9090 


.01619 


.06071 


.0005144 


22210 


3.17 


298 


6.0173 


.02019 


. 19075 


.0006401 


22211 


3.17 


561 


11.5675 


.02062 


.36671 


.0006537 


26105 


3.02 


131 


1.8242 


.01393 


.05508 


.0003t;62 


26808 


3.09 


222 


3.8811 


.01748 


. 11992 


.000.5402 


27507 


3.08 


75 


1.3746 


.01833 


.04234 


. 0005646 


28206 


3.07 


219 


4.3698 


.01996 


. 13415 


.0006126 


28806 


3. 02 


685 


14.4630 


.02111 


.43679 


.0006376 


32207 


3.48 


69 


1.25-'3 


.01822 


.04375 


.0006341 


33305 


3.41 


150 


3. 1346 


.02090 


. 10689 


.0007126 


33607 


3.22 


136 


2. 8903 


.02125 


.09307 


.0006843 


34606 


3.12 


280 


6. 1962 


.02213 


. 19332 


.0006904 


39507 


3.02 


111 


1.8862 


.01699 


.05696 


.0005132 


40305 


3.11 


179 


3.6003 


.02011 


.11197 


. 00062.55 


40405 


3.17 
■ 3.07 


46 
66 


.6316 
1.4892 


.01373 
.02251 


.02002 
.04572 


.00043.52 
.0006927 


42405 


42905 


3.17 
3.00 
3.29 


67 
260 
157 


1.2499 
4. 6146 
2. 6571 


.01866 
.01775 
.01692 


.03650 
. 13843 
.08742 


.000.5447 
. 0005324 
.0005568 


46105 


48,306 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



63 



Table 8. — Analyse'^ of plants, arranged accordinq to percentage of proteld nitrogen. 

l90S— Continued. 



Crop of 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 





Percent- 


Number 
of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Weight (in grams) of— 


Total pro- 


Proteid 


Record num- 
ber. 


age of 

proteld 

nitrogen 

in kernels. 






teid nitro- 
gen in all 
kernels 
(gram). 


nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


4&405 


3.31 


76 


0.9701 


0.01276 


0.03211 


0.0004225 


48506 


3.20 


556 


9.4585 


. 01701 


.30267 


.0005444 


48705 


3.13 


264 


• 4.3615 


.01652 


. 13652 


.0005171 


48706 


3.00 


379 


6. 1986 


.01635 


. 18596 


.00«4<)0ti 


49505 


3.24 


67 


1.2716 


.01898 


.04120 


.0006149 


50905 


3.30 


221 


2. 3982 


.01085 


.07914 


.0003581 


55005 


3.05 


393 


7.9684 


.02028 


.24304 


.0006185 


55006 


3.16 


451 


7. 1852 


.01593 


. 22705 


. O00.")034 


55205 


3.10 


40 


.6893 


.01723 


.02137 


. 0(105342 


55508 


3.11 


216 


3. 7407 


.01732 


.11636 


.0005386 


57305 


3.19 


501 


8.5777 


.01666 


.29188 


.OOO.WiC, 


57905 


3.18 


221 


2.4731 


.01118 


.07859 


. 0003556 


58207 


3.09 


307 


4.2207 


. 01375 


. 13042 


. 000-1248 


58705 


3.01 


235 


2.5436 


.01082 


. 07656 


. 0003256 


62805 


3.25 


111 


1.3451 


.01212 


.04272 


.0003938 


63105 


3.24 


90 


1.5452 


.01717 


.05007 


. 0O()55ti3 


72405 


3. .36 


213 


8.4415 


.03963 


.28363 


.0013316 


72707 


3.49 


225 


4.5806 


.02036 


. 15986 


.0007105 


72806 


3.01 


110 


2.0970 


. 01906 


.06312 


.0005738 


74507 


3.02 


493 


9.2130 


.01869 


. 27823 


. 0)05644 


81406 


3.31 


72 


1.2391 


. 01721 


.04101 


. 0005697 


84906 


3.43 


382 


7.5438 


.01975 


.25873 


. OOOt)773 


91305 


3.21 


138 


3.0940 


.02242 


.09932 


.0007197 


91905 


3.36 


198 


3.4436 


.01739 


.11.570 


. 0005844 


92405 


3.10 


214 


3.4356 


.01605 


. 10650 


.0004977 


92406 


3.11 


380 


8.2366 


.02168 


.25616 


.0006741 


92505 


3.00 


156 


2.6615 


.01706 


.07985 


.0005118 


94208 


3.10 


322 


3. 7828 


.01175 


.11727 


. 0003642 


94906 

Average 


3.41 


685 


12.3862 


.01808 


.42236 


.0006166 


3.184 


235.5 


4.38558 


.018366 


. 139656 


.000.58156 



3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17506 


3.52 


93 


2. 2881 


0.02460 


0.08044 


0. 0008660 


17507 


3.80 


43 


. 7220 


.01795 


.02933 


.0006822 


18905 


3.81 
3.61 


103 
89 


1.4864 
1.4484 


.01443 
.01627 


. 05663 
.05228 


. 000.5498 
.000.5875 


21209 


21811 


3.75 


567 


11.9114 


.02101 


.44666 


.0007877 


21908 


3.82 


173 


3. .5574 


.020.56 


. 13589 


. 0007855 


22209 


3.84 


31 


.4336 


.01399 


.01665 


.000.5371 


26107 


3.92 


144 


2.0390 


.01416 


.07993 


.0005.551 


32608 


3.78 


55 


1.0183 


.01851 


.03849 


. 0006998 


34206 


3.73 


81 


1.5940 


.01968 


.05946 


.0007340 


36905 


3.88 


267 


5.0200 


.01880 


. 19478 


.0007295 


38505 


3.61 


563 


12. 1088 


.02252 


.43713 


.0007764 


42205 


3.63 


94 


1.8494 


.01967 


.06713 


.0007142 


45005 


3.58 


235 


3.2340 


. 01376 


.11.575 


.0004927 


48505 


3.66 


137 


. 1.91.54 


. 01398 


.07010 


.0005117 


49905 


3.62 


23 


. 6760 


.02939 


.02436 


.0010640 


50705 


3.54 


30 


.59.58 


. 01986 


.02109 


.0007032 


50906 


3.. 57 


114 


1.7280 


.01516 


.06169 


.000.5411 


66006 


3. .54 


366 


6.0090 


.01fi42 


.21272 


.000.5812 


66008 


3.59 


174 


3. 1.555 


.01814 


.11328 


.0006510 


72706 


3.86 


591 


14.6802 


.02484 


. .56666 


. 00095S8 


94909 

Average 


3.60 


218 


3. 6977 


.01696 


. 13312 


.0006106 


3.69 


190.5 


3.68947 


.018666 


. 13698 


.00068723 



(34 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 8. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen. Crop 

of i90c3— Continued. 



4 TO 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 


Number 


Weight (in grams) of— 


Total pro- 


Proteid 


age of f ^ 
proteid 1 ^l.^^^^, 
nitrogen ""^ |nt 
in kernels. P^*°*- 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


gen in all average ker- 
kernels i nel 
(gram), (gram). 


21812 


4.26 
4.04 
4.43 
4.15 
4.33 
4.13 
4.18 
4.21 
4.42 
4.45 
4.39 


983 14.8139 
216 4. 0258 
'525 12.1819 
254 1 4.5123 
207 4. 1281 


0.01507 
.01877 
.02317 
.01777 
.01994 
.01555 
.01712 
.01828 
. 01984 
.01217 
.01690 


0.63107 
. 16377 
.53889 
. 18726 
. 17875 
.05974 
.03148 
.09082 
.09030 
.24213 
. 16993 


0.0006420 
. 0007582 
.0010265 
.0007373 
.0008635 
.0006423 
.0007155 
. 0007696 
. 0008767 
.000.5417 
.0007421 


21813 

21909 

27308 

34405 


43505 

45705 

55007 

69305 

76206 

92506 

Average 


93 

44 
118 
103 

447 
229 


1.4464 

.7532 

2. 1571 

2.0430 

5.4411 
3. 8709 


4.27 


292.6 


5.03397 


.017689 ' .21674 


.00075594 



MORE THAN 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN 



17505 


4.70 


29 


0.3885 


0.01340 


0.01826 


0.0006296 


21206 


5.23 


149 


2. 8.564 


.01917 


. 14939 


.0010026 


21210 


5.03 


237 


3.9143 


.01578 


. 19689 


.0007934 


21706 


4.71 


807 


19.3318 


.02390 


.91052 


.0011283 


21911 


5.48 


383 


8.4593 


.02209 


.46356 


.0012103 


38605 


5.85 


61 


1.2124 


.01988 


.07093 


.0011627 


38607 


4.55 


19 


.3037 


.01598 


.01382 


.0007273 


40205 


4.69 


194 


3.6302 


.01871 


. 17026 


.0008776 


48406 


4.87 


249 


3.2964 


.01324 


. 16053 


. 0006447 


65305 


4.92 


78 


1.8018 


.02310 


.08865 


.0011365 


69805 


5.82 


110 


2.4420 


.02220 


. 14213 


. 0012921 


72605 


4.65 


65 


1. 1166 


.01718 


.05192 


. 0007988 


72607 


5.59 


188 


3.4442 


.01832 


. 19253 


.0010241 


92306 

Average 


4.93 


347 


6.0091 


.01732 


.29625 


. 0008539 


5.07 


208.28 


4. 15727 


.01859 


.208974 


.0009487 



Table 9. — Summary of analyses of plants, arranged accoirling to percentage of proteid 

nitrogen. Crop of 1903. 



Range of per- 
centage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Number of — 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Proteid nitrogen 
(in grams) in- 


Analy- 
ses. 


Ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


All ker- 
nels. 


Average 
kernel. 


1 to 2 


1.749 

2.32 

2.73 

3. 18 

3.69 

4.27 

5.07 


28 
65 
145 
66 
22 
11 
14 


320.3 

396 

370 

235 

190 

292 

208 


6. 2382 


0.01871 


0. 10655 
. 19032 
.19442 
. 13966 
. 13698 
. 21674 
.20897 


0. 0003291 
. 0004660 
.000.5271 
.0005816 
. 0006872 
. 0007559 
.0009487 


2 to 2.5 


8.2502 i .02011 
7.17.55 ! .01935 
4.3856 i .01837 
3.6895 .01867 
5.0340 1 .01769 


2.5 to 3 


3 to 3.5 


3.5 to 4 


4 to 4 5 


4.5 and over 


4. 1573 


.01859 



Table 10 shows the analyses of the crop of 1903 arranged on the 
basis of weight of average kernel. Determinations of gliadin and 
glutenin were made in these anal3^ses and the sums of these are 
inserted in this table/' All plants having an average kernel weight 

« Determinations of gliadin and glutenin were made by methods practically the same as 
those described by Prof. Harry Snyder in Bulletin No. 63 of the Minnesota Experiment 
Station, except that smaller quantities were used. 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



65 



of less than 0.010 gram form the first class and each succeeding class 
increases by 0.002 gram. Table 11 is a summary of these analyses. 

Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according, to weight of average Icernel. Crop of 1903. 
WEIGHT OF AVi^RAGE KERNEL, 0.000 TO 0.010 GRAM. 



Record 
number. 


Weight 
of aver- 


Num- 
ber of 


Weight 
of kernels 


Per- 
centage 
of pro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in- 


Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 


Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nitrogen 
(gram) in- 


^.'t^a^ '^ZT" on plant 
kernel on | ^„,.'™ci 
(gram). ( plant. Cgiams). 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


22205 0.00953 

57105 ' .00916 

58206 ' .00943 

Q^nfi'^ ' nnssn 


283 

407 

148 

37 


2.6965 

3.7263 

1.3961 

.3146 


2.81 
2.76 
2.67 
2.81 


0.0002677 
.0002527 
.0002519 
.0002389 


0.07577 
. 10285 
.03728 
.00884 


1.97 


0.0001877 


0.05312 










i 1 










Average . 


.00915 219 2.0334 


2.76 


.0002.528 


.05618 


1.97 


.0001877 


.05312 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.010 TO 0.012 GRAM. 



37906 

45605 

50905 

57905 

58705 

94208 

Average . 


0.01086 
.01161 
.01085 
.01118 
.01082 
.01175 


19 
61 
221 
''21 
235 
322 


0.2063 
.7081 
2. 3982 
2.4731 
2.5436 
3. 7828 


2.44 
2.82 
3.30 
3.18 
3.01 
3.10 


0.0002649 
.0003273 
.0003581 
.0003556 
.0003258 
.0003642 


0. 00503 
.01997 
.07914 
. 07859 
.07656 
. 11727 


j 




■ ■■ 








2.92 
2.47 


0.0003264 
.0002673 


0.07221 
.06283 








.01118 


179 


2.0187 


2.98 


.0003326 .06276 


2.69 


. 0002968 


.06752 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.012 TO 0.014 GRAM. 



17505 

22209 

26105 

39606 

40405 

42206 

45005 

45805 

48405 

48406 

48408 

48505 

50706 

58207 

58905 

62805 

76206 

85206 

94605 

Average . 



0.01340 
.01399 
. 01393 
. 01341 
.01373 
. 01264 
.01376 
.01234 
.01276 
.01324 
. 01291 
.01398 
.01343 
. 01375 
. 01355 
. 01212 
.01217 
.01312 
.01307 



.01323 



29 

31 
131 
346 

46 

25 
235 
124 

76 
249 

27 
137 

35 
307 
170 
111 
447 
376 

56 



155. 7 



0. 3885 


4.70 


.4336 


3.84 


1.8242 


3.02 


4.6383 


2.37 


.6316 


3.17 


.3161 


1.46 


3.2340 


3.58 


1.5298 


1.84 


.9701 


3.31 


3.2964 


4.87 


.3485 


2.81 


1.91.54 


3.66 


.4701 


2.80 


4.2207 


3.09 


2.3031 


2.43 


1.3451 


3.25 


5.4411 


4.45 


4.9315 


2.66 


.7319 


1.95 


2.0510 


3.12 



0.0006296 
. 0005371 
. 0003662 
.0003177 
.00043.52 
.0001846 
.0004927 
.0002700 
.0004225 
.0006447 
.0003627 
.000.5117 
.0003761 
.0004248 
.0003292 
. 0003938 
.0005417 
. 0003332 
.0002549 



0.01826 
.01665 
.05508 
.10967 
.02002 
.00462 
.11575 
.02815 
.03211 
. 160.53 
.00979 
.07010 
.01316 
. 13042 
.05596 
.04272 
.24213 
.13118 
.01427 



.0004120 : .06687 



2.25 
1.76' 



2.49 

'•i.'os' 



l.f 



0.0001871 



. 0002979 
.'6662460' 



.0003424 
.'6662471' 



.0002641 



0. 04398 



.08168 
."63371' 



. 10510 



.07499 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.014 TO 0.016 GRAM. 



18805 ! 0.01.567 

18905 01443 

18906 01420 

21210 01577 

21710 01437 

21812 01507 

26107 .01416 

33408 01446 

38607 01598 

43505 01.5.55 

48407 1 .01572 

50906 ! .01516 

55006 ; .01593 

55305 ! .01507 

57006 1 .01453 



137 

103 

65 

237 

59 

983 

144 

77 

19 

93 

718 

114 

451 

167 

701 



2. 1462 


2.02 


1.4864 


3.81 


.9229 


3.48 


3.9143 


5.03 


.8478 


2.59 


14.8139 


4.26 


2. 0390 


3.92 


1.1132 


1.39 


.3037 


4.55 


1.4464 


4.13 


11.2890 


1.50 


1.7280 


3.57 


7. 1852 


3.16 


2.5160 


2.48 


10. 1836 


2.76 



0.0003164 
.0005498 
.0004941 
.0007934 
.0003722 
.0006420 
. 0005551 
.0002009 
. 0007273 
. 0006423 
. 0002358 
.0005411 
. 000.5034 
. 0003736 
. 0004010 



0. 04335 
. 05663 
.03212 
. 19689 
.02196 
. 63107 
.07993 
. 01547 
.01382 
. 05974 
. 16933 
. 06169 
.22705 
. 06240 
. 28107 



2.02 
1.35 



1.75 
1.97 



0.0003218 



.0002113 



.0003044 
.0001912 



0.03315 
".'65245" 



.0002788 
.0002969 



.29934 
.02753 



. 12574 
.04957 



27889— No. 78—05- 



66 



IMPROVIlSrG THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 10. — Analy.'tes of plants, arramjed according to weight of average Tcernel. Crop of 

i9a5— Continued. 

WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 014 TO 0.016 GRAM— Continued. 



Record 
number. 



57506 

63506 

69705 

72905 

74508..... 

86105 

92205..... 

92305 

92905 

92906 

94905 

95707 

Average . 



Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(.gram). 



0. 01534 

.01568 
.01550 
.01585 
.01434 
. 01495 
.01525 
.01491 
.01534 
.01592 
. 015.53 
.01457 



I Per- 

Num- woigvit centage 

^'•° ofkernelsl?fP™- 
kemels , . teid ni- 

plant, i^srams). ■^^^^^_ 
nels. 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 



.01516 



180 
153 

244 
167 

57 
203 
345 
160 
176 
181 
286 

52 



2.7616 
2.3986 
3.7810 
2. 6462 

.8172 
3.0282 
5.2616 
2. 3859 
2.7000 
2.8816 
4.4423 

.7577 



3.5480 



2.44 
2. .50 
2.48 
2.60 
2.56 
2.74 
2.93 
3.50 
2.99 
2.35 
2.47 



3.00 



Average 
kernel. 



0.0004296 
.0003825 
.0003874 
. 0003930 
.0003728 
. 0003923 
. 0004179 
.0004369 
. 0005369 
. 00047P0 
.0003650 
.0003599 



Kernels 
on plant. 



.0004555 



0.07733 
.05853 
.09453 
. 06563 
.02125 
.07934 
. 14417 
.0!;991 
. 09450 
.08616 
. 10439 
.01872 



. 10619 



Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
lenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 



Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nitrogen 
(gram) in — 



Average 
kernel. 



Kernels 
on plant. 



2.34 0.0003.590 0.0^4(2 



1.76 1 .0002805 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.016 TO O.OIS GRAM. 



17306 


0.01645 


243 


17406 


.01686 


124 1 


17507 


.01795 


43 


20705 


.01698 


109 ! 


21208 


.01798 


287 


21209 


.01627 


89 1 


21307 


.01796 


143 


21308 


.01641 


354 ; 


21805 


.01699 


1,232 


21808 


.01708 


1,156 


22206 


.01720 


146 


22208 


.01619 


118 


26806 


.01793 


152 


26808 


.01748 


222 


26907 


.01792 


102 


26909 


.01667 


180 


27308 


.017Z7 


254 


33106 


.01716 


18 


33406 


.01627 


283 


37707 


.01710 


193 


39507 


.01699 


HI 


44.505 


.01764 


340 


45705 


.01712 


44 


46105 


.01775 


260 


46107 


.017.56 


478 


48306 


.01692 


157 


48506 


.01701 


556 


48705 


. 01652 


264 


48706 


.01635 


379 


48806 


.01798 


547 


55205 


.01723 


40 


55307 


.01663 


342 


55508 


.01732 


216 


55607 


.01734 


138 


55905 


.01751 


331 


55906 


.01603 


499 


56105 


.01709 


336 


56107 


.01658 


872 


56209 


.01664 


950 


57005 


.01746 


88 


57305 


.01666 


501 


57308 


.01705 


577 


57509 


.01739 


611 


59606 


.01712 


567 


60605. . . . . 


.01701 


35 


63105 


.01717 


90 


66006 


.01642 


366 



3.9968 

2.0907 

.7720 

1.8517 

5. 1594 

1.4484 

2.5691 

5.8080 

20.9290 

19. 7446 

2.5712 

1.9090 

2. 7255 

3.8811 

1.8276 

2.9999 

4. 5123 

.3089 

4. 6045 

3.3004 

1.8862 

5.9990 

.7532 

4.6146 

8.3935 

2.6571 

9.4585 

4.3615 

6. 1986 

9.8346 

.6893 

5.6864 

3.7407 

2. 3931 

5. 7948 

7.9968 

5. 7431 

14.4556 

15. 8086 

1.5364 

8.5777 

9.8378 

10. 6261 

9.7084 

. ,5952 

1.. 54.52 

6.0090 



3.09 
3.29 
3.80 
3.09 
3.24 
3.61 
3.04 
3.45 
2.69 
2.57 
3.22 
3.18 
2.60 
3.09 
2.61 
2.80 
4.15 
2.94 
2.87 
2.93 
3.02 
2.94 
4.18 
3.00 
2.54 
3.29 
3.20 
3.13 
3.00 
2.70 
3.10 
1.89 
3.11 
2.69 
2.67 
2.81 
2.73 
2.96 
2.59 
2.71 
3.19 
1.69 
2.54 
2.16 
1.87 
3.24 
3.54 



0. 0005082 
. 0005547 
. 000(:822 
. 0005249 
. 0005824 
.0005875 
.0005461 
.0005660 
.0004569 
. 0004389 
.0005.538 
.0005144 
. 0004662 
. 0005402 
.0004677 
. 0004667 
.0007373 
.0005045 
.0004670 
.0005010 
.0005132 
.0005187 
.00071.55 
.0005324 
. 00044e0 
. 000,5568 
. 0005444 
.0005171 
. 0004906 
. 0004877 
.000.5342 
.0003142 
. 0005386 
.000-1665 
.0004674 
.0004503 
.0004667 
. 0004907 
. 0004310 
.0004731 
. 0005826 
.0002881 
.0004417 
.0003(98 
.0003180 
.000.5.563 
.0005812 



0. 12350 

.06878 
.02934 
. 05722 
. 16712 
.05228 
.07810 
.20038 
.56299 
. 50744 
.08086 
.06071 
.07086 
.11992 
.04995 
.08400 
. 18726 
.00908 
. 13215 
.09670 
. 05696 
. 17637 
.03148 
.13^3 
.21319 
.08742 
. 30267 
. 13652 
.18596 
. 26553 
.02137 
. 10747 
. 1 1636 
.06437 
.1.5470 
.22471 
. 15679 
.42790 
. 40945 
.04164 
.29188 
. 16626 
. 26990 
.20970 
.01113 
.05007 
.21272 



1.9S 
2.11 
2.14 



0.0033S 6 0.11093 



2.08 
2.13 
2.17 
1.56 



1.56 
1.96 



1.75 
1.47 
2.12 
2.23 
2.21 
2.09 



.0003348 .38700 
. 0003629 . 05425 
.00034^5 .04084 



.0003591 



.0003652 
.0003604 
.0003(91 
. 0002577 



.0002.594 
.0003395 



. 0003064 
.0002356 
.0003622 
.0003697 
.0003677 
.0003649 



. 17458 
.0.5660 
. 20.525 
.0«?04 



.08871 
.07332 



.10141 
.11755 
.12175 
. 32236 
.34937 
.03211 



1.38 .0002266 .08292 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



67 



Table 10. — Analyses of plan's, arranged according to weight of average Jcernel. Crop of 

i&OJ— Continued. 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.016 TO 0.018 GRAM— Continued. 



Record 


Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram) . 


Num- 
tier of 
kernels 

on 
plant. 


Weight 
of kernels 
on plant 
(gi-ams). 


Per- 
centage 
of pro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in kei-- 

nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 


Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
teiiin ni- 
ti-ogen in 
kernels. 


Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nitrogen 
(gram) in- 


nuinDer. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


72605 

■ 72e06 

74506 

74605 

74607 

76205 

81406 

85205 

86106 

91905 

91906 

92207 

92306 

92405 

92407 

92505 

92506 

92908 

94407 

94909 

95510 

95705 

Average . 


0.01718 
.01724 
.01781 
.01784 
.01699 
.01695 
.01721 
.01625 
.01749 
.01739 
.01774 
.01767 
.01732 
.01605 
.01695 
.01706 
.01690 
.01732 
.01615 
.01696 
.01783 
.01626 


65 
543 

23 
399 
491 
498 

72 
214 
436 
198 
200 
209 
347 
214 

.53 
156 
229 
187 
419 
218 
159 
636 


1.1166 
9.3629 
.4096 
7.1181 
8.3406 
8. 4407 
1.2391 
3.4766 
7.6241 
3.4436 
3.5486 
3. 6926 
6.0091 
3.4356 
.8983 
2.6615 
3.8709 
3.2388 
6.7664 
3.6977 
2.8356 
10.3426 


4.65 
1.89 
2.73 
2.60 
2.56 
2.35 
3.31 
2 60 
2.63 
3.36 
2.81 
2.55 
4.93 
3.10 
1.66 
3.00 
4.39 
2.32 
2.07 
3.60 
1.81 
2.54 


0. 0007988 
.0003414 
.0004862 
.0004638 
.0004349 
. 0003983 
.000.5697 
. 0004224 
.0004.599 
.0005844 
. 0004986 
. 0004505 
. 0008539 
.0004977 
.0002814 
.0005118 
.0007421 
.0004018 
.0003343 
.0006106 
.0003228 
.0004131 


0.05192 
. 18538 
.01118 
. 18507 
. 21352 
































. 19836 
.04101 
.09039 
. 20052 
.11570 
.09972 
.09416 
.29625 
. 10650 
.01491 
.07985 
. 16993 
.07514 
.14007 
.13312 
.05132 
.26270 














. 




















;::;::;::;:;::::: 








4.06 


0. 0007032 


0. 24397 
























i 








.01709 


305.9 


5.2055 


2.93 


.0005020 


.14618 


■2.07 


. 0003519 


. 13.548 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.018 TO 0.020 GRAM. 



17305 

17408 

17409 

20710 

21205 

21206 

21207 

21306 

2171) 

21809 

21810 

21813 

21905 

21907 

21912 

• 22207 

26905 

26906 

27005 

27205 

27306 

27307 

27507 

28206 

32207 

32608 

33105 

33107 

33405 

33906 

34205 

34206 

34208 

34405 

36905 

37305 

37705 

38005 

38506 

38605 

38608 

38706 

40205 


0.01984 
.01852 
.01857 
.01974 
.01922 
.01917 
.01955 
.018.37 
. 01968 
.01919 
. 01982 
. 01877 
.01809 
.01851 
.01907 
.01940 
.01966 
.01859 
.01895 
.01841 
.01945 
.01847 
.01833 
.01996 
.01822 
.01851 
.01939 
.01919 
.01930 
.01921 
.01972 
.01968 
.01916 
.01994 
.01880 
.01987 
.01972 
.01808 
.01975 
.01987 
.01913 
.01988 
.01871 


183 
497 
802 
867 
123 
149 
118 
226 
873 
418 

52 
216 
791 
158 
510 
169 
326 
228 
866 
891 
684 
167 

75 
219 

69 

55 
132 
318 
421 
119 
464 

81 
156 
207 
267 
309 
461 
139 

85 

61 
158 
365 
194 


3. 6302 
9.2038 
14.89.57 
17.1115 
2.3642 
2.8564 
2.3066 
4. 1516 
17. 1820 
8.0214 
1.0304 
4.0258 
14.3111 
2.9248 
9.7236 
3.2787 
6.4102 
4. 2376 
16.4120 
16.4061 
13.3011 
3.0850 
1.3746 
4.3698 
1.2573 
1.0183 
2.5601 
6. 1026 
8. 1268 
2. 2862 
9. 1498 
1.5940 
2.9886 
4.1281 
5.0200 
6. 1394 
8.0905 
2.5134 
1.6799 
1.2124 
3.0228 
7.2545 
3.6302 


3.03 
2.18 
2.75 
2.83 
3.16 
5.23 
2.96 
2.90 
2.71 
2.73 
2. 69 
4.04 
2.64 
3.35 
2.31 
2.77 
2.76 
2.71 
2.63 
2.41 
2.47 
2.53 
3.08 
3.07 
3.48 
3.78 
2.91 
2.35 
2.03 
2.81 
2.73 
3.73 
2.13 
4.33 
3.88 
2.96 
2.64 
2.84 
2.89 
5.85 
2.82 
2.59 
4.69 


0.0006010 
.0004037 
. 0005108 
. 0005586 
. 0006074 
.0010026 
. 0005766 
.0005327 
. 000.5334 
.0005238 
. 0005330 
.0007.582 
.0004777 
.0006201 
. 0004404 
. 000.5374 
.0005427 
.000.5037 
.0004984 
.0005937 
. 0004803 
.0004674 
.000.5646 
. 0006126 
. 0006341 
. 0006998 
.0005671 
.0004510 
.0003919 
.000.5399 
.0005383 
. 0007340 
.0004081 
.0008635 
.0007295 
.0005881 
.000.5327 
.0005135 
.0005712 
.0011627 
.000.5.394 
.0005148 
.0008776 


0. 10999 
.20065 
.40964 
.48428 
.07471 
. 14939 
.06804 
. 12039 
. 46563 
.21898 
.02772 
. 16377 
.37781 
.09798 
. 22461 
.09082 
. 17692 
.11484 
.43164 
.39539 
.32853 
.07805 
.04234 
.13415 
.04375 
.03849 
. 07450 
. 14341 
. 16498 
.06424 
.24979 
.05946 
.06366 
. 17875 
. 19478 
. 18173 
.23998 
.07138 
.048.^5 
.07093 
.08522 
. 18789 
. 17026 




















2.00 


0.0003948 


0.34222 


























2.18 


.0004183 


. 17487 


2.14 
2.18 
2.15 


.0004017 
.0003944 
.0003980 


.08615 
.31198 
.06288 


1.82 
2.09 
1.82 
1.00 
1.70 


.0003531 
.0004109 
.0003383 
. 0003600 
.0003130 


. 05967 
. 13398 
.07712 
.31182 
. 27890 














2. 42 


.0004830 


. 10575 








3. 50 
1.92 


.0006787 
.0004163 


.07450 
. 12643 
















.. 










2.44 


.0004865 


.10073 


2.29 
1.26 
1.23 


.0004550 
.6002485 
.0002224 


. 14060 
. 10194 
.03091 








1.73 


.0003309 


.05229 ■ 


3.07 


.0005744 


.11145 



68 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average l^ernel. Crop of 

1903— Continued. 

WEIGHT OP AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.018 TO 0.020 GRAM— Continued, 



Record 
number. 



42205. . . . 
4290.5. . . . 

44607 

45li0fi.... 
4i;i0ti.... 

4S10ti 

48.")0S 

laX).") 

.5070.J 

.MOO."!.... 

.'■>.5007 

.55008.... 

55206 

55306. . . . 
55507. . . . 

56106 

56205 

56206 

57007.... 
57306.... 
57307.... 
57406.... 
57407.... 
57507.... 

57H0S 

57S05.... 

5SS0o 

59605 

63505.... 

65306 

65307.... 

(KiOOS 

ri9305.... 

69505 

72406.... 
72607.... 
72806.... 
74.507.... 

81405 

81.505 

8490.5 

84906 

8S905 

88906 

9220S 

92408 

92409 

92.507 

92909 

94205 

94206 

94207 

912(19 

9440(1 

9490(i 

919(17 

91908 

9550(1 

95.108 

95706 

Average . 



Weight 


Num- 


of aver- 


ber of 


age 


Icernels 


kernel 


on 


(gram). 


plant. 


0.01967 


94 


. 01866 


67 


.01806 


101 


.018.34 


220 


.01964 


82 


.01919 


608 


.01858 


603 


. 01898 


67 


. 01986 


30 


. 01804 


862 


. 01828 


118 


.01846 


944 


.01965 


578 


.01931 


214 


.01949 


504 


.01866 


644 


.01959 


333 


. 01829 


509 


.01975 


168 


.01838 


434 


.01801 


261 


.01846 


135 


.01968 


762 


. 01946 


359 


.01968 


438 


.01814 


270 


.01999 


1,158 


. 01880 


382 


.01934 


208 


.01807 


544 


.01878 


373 


.01814 


174 


.01984 


103 


.01847 


255 


.01929 


430 


.01832 


188 


.01906 


110 


.01869 


493 


.01862 


240 


.01940 


146 


.01927 


37 


.01975 


382 


.01811 


293 


.01814 


546 


. 01876 


353 


.01827 


207 


.01814 


315 


.01916 


505 


.01916 


529 


.01893 


64 


.01866 


402 


. 01909 


718 


.01895 


190 


.01923 


549 


.01808 


685 


.01948 


626 


.01894 


125 


.01852 


597 


.01954 


740 


.01934 


267 


.01901 


349.6 



Weight 
of ker'nels 



Per 
centage 
of pro- 
teid ni 



on plant froaen 
(grams), ^ogen 



1.8494 

1.2499 

1.8246 

4.0358 

1.6103 

11.6655 

11.2008 

1.2716 

.5958 

15. 5835 

2.1571 

17. 4226 

11.3592 

4. 1323 

9. 8228 

12.0161 

6. 5232 

9.3093 

3. 3176 

7.9772 

4.7117 

2.4923 

14.9992 

6.9861 

8.6189 

4. 8988 

23. 1471 

7. 1828 

4.0230 

9.8298 

7.0051 

3. 1.5.55 

2. 0430 

4.7116 

8. 2929 

3.4442 

2.0970 

9.2130 

4. 5737 

2. 8327 

.7130 

7. 5438 

5. 3069 

9.9034 

6. 6206 

3. 7820 

5.7131 

9. 6779 

10. 1363 

1.2117 

7. 5006 

13. 70.57 

3. 6006 

10. 55.56 

12.3862 

12.1918 

2. 3678 

11.0548 

14.4617 

5.1629 



6.6327 



in ker- 
nels. 



3.63 
3.17 
2.44 
1.91 
2.54 
2.38 
2.76 
3.24 
3.54 
1.34 
4.21 
2.60 
2.56 
2.18 
2.63 
2.57 
2.51 
2.42 
2.65 
2.86 
2.43 
2.75 
2.62 
2.85 
2.64 
2.87 
2.74 
2.12 
1.90 
2.41 
2.28 
3.59 
4.42 
2.29 
2.95 
5.59 
3.01 
3.02 
2.62 
2.94 
■2.32 
3.43 
2.83 
2.65 
2.72 
2.97 
2.30 
2.58 
2.70 
1.65 
2.78 
2.86 
2.49 
2.47 
3.41 
2.94 
1.96 
2.74 
2.56 
2.73 



2.88 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in- 



Average 
kernel. 



0.0007142 
.000.5447 
.0004408 
.0003504 
.0004988 
.0004567 
. 0005127 
. 0006149 
.0007032 
. 0002422 
. 0007696 
. 0(IJ4799 
.0005031 
. 0004210 
. 0005126 
.0004795 
.0004917 
. 0004426 
. 0005233 
. 00052,57 
. 0004387 
. 0005077 
. 0005157 
.0005545 
.0005195 
.0005207 
.0005464 
.0003986 
. 0003674 
. 0004282 
.0004355 
.0006510 
. 0008767 
. 0004231 
. 0005689 
.0010241 
. 0005738 
.000.5644 
. 0004879 
. 0005704 
. 0004471 
. 0008773 
.0005126 
. 0004807 
. 0005102 
. 0005426 
. 0004171 
.0004944 
.0005173 
.0003124 
.0005187 
. 0005460 
. 0004719 
. 0004749 
. 0006166 
. 0005726 
.0003713 
. 0005074 
.0005003 
.0005279 



.0005476 



Kernels 
on plant, 



0.06713 
. 036.50 
.044.52 
.07708 
.04090 
.27765 
. 30986 
.04120 
.02109 
. 20881 
.09082 
.45299 
. 29079 
.09008 
.25834 
.30881 
. 16373 
.22529 
. 08792 
.22815 
.11445 
.06854 
. 39297 
. 19905 
. 22756 
. 14060 
. 63422 
. 15228 
.07644 
.23690 
. 1.5971 
. 11328 
.09030 
.10790 
.24464 
. 19253 
.06312 
. 27823 
.11710 
.08328 
.01654 
. 25873 
. 15019 
. 26245 
.18008 
.11233 
. 13140 
. 24969 
. 27367 
.01999 
. 20851 
.39199 
.08965 
.26073 
.42236 
.35844 
.04641 
.30291 
.37023 
.14095 



Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 



Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nitrogen 
(gram) in — 



Average 
kernel. 



Kernels 
on plant 



. 18039 



2.73 0.0005370 0.05049 



l.SO .00034.54 , .20997 



2.21 
1.58 
1.87 



2.07 
2.09 
1.85 
1.95 



2.13 
1.86 



2.68 
2.11 



1.68 
1.81 



. 0004040 
.0002917 
. 0003675 



. 0004034 
. 0003900 
.0003624 
.0003566 



. 0003932 
. 0003660 



.0004861 
. 0004218 



.0003036 
.0003399 



. 0004598 



. 04767 
.27528 
. 21241 



. 20333 
.25114 
. 12068 
. 18153 



.05309 

. 27898 
. 10828 



. 13126 
. 48839 



. 16514 
, 12680 



.08645 



.15541 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.020 TO 0.022 GRAM. 



17308.. 

17405.. 
20706. . 
20708.. 
20709.. 
20895. . 



0. 02012 


61 


.02127 


738 


. 02033 


163 


. 02024 


122 


.02063 


258 


.02157 


C97 



1:2275 


3.25 


15. 6996 


2.13 


3.3138 


2.78 


2.4690 


2.58 


5.3229 


3.05 


14. 6942 


3.32 



0.0006540 
. 0004531 
.0005652 
. 0005221 
.0006292 
. 000 1999 



0. 03994 
.33441 
.09212 
.06399 
. 16235 
.48784 



2.05 



2.31 

2.26 



0. 0004168 



.0004766 
.0004875 



0. 06793 



.12296 
. 33208 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



69 



Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average TcerneJ. Crop of 

iy'OJ— Continued. 

WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.020 TO 0.022 GRAM— Continued. 



Record 
num.^er. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram) . 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels 

on 
plant. 


Weight 
of kernels 
on j)lant 
(grams) . 


Per- 
centage 
of pro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 


Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin aitrogen 
(gram) in — 


Avei-age 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant'. 


21212 

21305 

21707 

21709 

21811 

21908 

21913 

22210 

22211 

25205 

26908 

27207 

37305 

27505 

28806 

32206 

32606 

33305 

33606 

33607 

33905 

37703 

38606 

39205 

39405 

40305 

44605 

44606 

48409 

5500o 

55506 

55605 

55908 

57405 

57408 

58806 

63106 

65308 

66005 

69506 

69806 

72705 

72707 

73306 

74305 

74606 

80305 

81705 

81706 

81709 

84405 

88606 

88608 

88609 

92406 

92907 

9.5.507 

95509 

Average . 


0.02049 
.02004 
.02125 
.02141 
.02101 
.02056 
.02072 
.02019 
.02062 
.02066 
.02073 
.02004 
.02085 
.02183 
.02111 
.02052 
.02145 
.02090 
.02144 
.02125 
.02194 
.021.55 
.02110 
.02089 
. 02093 
.02011 
.02049 

. .02035 
. 02048 
. 02028 
.02062 
.02184 
.02175 
.02031 
.02047 
.02049 
. 02001 
. 02008 
.02073 
.02047 
.02153 
.02191 
.02036 
.02062 
. 02047 
.02079 
.02165 
.02106 
.02132 
.02175 
.02043 
.02068 
.02075 
.02100 
.02168 
.02040 
.02029 
.02136 


84 
312 
582 
361 
.567 
173 
492 
298 
561 
522 
192 
166 
267 
539 
685 
507 

94 
1.50 
382 
136 
508 

56 

401 

1,031 

447 

179 

55 
124 
314 
393 
866 
500 
562 

41 
596 

95 
165 
583 
370 
663 
558 
372 
225 
414 
216 
464 
729 
465 
722 
757 
428 
481 

74 
470 
380 
219 
571 
138 


1.7216 

6.2514 

12.3685 

7.7296 

11.9114 

3.. 5.574 

10. 1925 

6.0173 

11.5675 

10. 7836 

3.9797 

3.3266 

5. .5666 

12.0399 

14. 46.30 

10. 4036 

2.0162 

3. 1346 

8. 1890 

2.8903 

11.1476 

1.2069 

8. 4605 

21.. 5399 

9.3541 

3. 6003 

1.1271 

2. .5235 

6. 4302 

7.9684 

17.8.506 

10.9180 

12.2210 

.8328 

12.2004 

1.9469 

3.3006 

11.7066 

7. 6690 

13.. 5696 

12.0136 

9. 1.522 

4.5806 

8.5373 

4. 4222 

9. 6451 

15.78.35 

9.7922 

15.3928 

16.4692 

8. 7448 

9.9456 

1.. 53.55 

9.8719 

8. 2366 

4.4673 

12. 1.592 

2.9475 


2.16 
2. 67 
2.19 
2.47 
3.75 
3.82 
3.01 
3.17 
3.17 
2.71 
2.96 
2.92 
2.58 
2.12 
3.02 
1.81 
2.88 
3.41 
2.21 
3.22 
1.61 
2.34 
2.63 
2.11 
2.88 
3.11 
2.86 
2.90 
2.02 
3.05 
2.80 
2.64 
2.42 
1.98 
2.61 
1.88 
2.79 
2.09 
2.63 
2.50 
1.66 
2.13 
3.49 
2.45 
1.98 
2.30 
1.81 
1.98 
2.71 
2. 28 
2.48 
2.53 
2.47 
2.42 
3.11 
2.. 56 
2. ,59 
2.48 


0.0004427 
.00053.50 
.0004654 
.0005289 
.0007877 
.0(X)7S.55 
.0006235 
.0006401 
. 0006537 
. 0005599 
.0006135 
.0005850 
.0005379 
.0004627 
.0006.376 
.0003714 
.0006177 
.0007126 
.0004738 
.0006843 
.0003533 
.000.50.53 
.000.5.549 
.0004407 
.0006027 
. 0006255 
.000.5861 
. 000.5902 
.0004137 
.0006185 
. 0005773 
.000.5765 
.0005262 
.0004022 
.0005343 
.000.3853 
.0005581 
.0004197 
.0005451 
.0005117 
.0003574 
.00046ti8 
.0007105 
.0005052 
.0004054 
.0004781 
.0003919 
.0004170 
. 0005778 
. 0004960 
. 0005067 
. 0005231 
. 0005125 
.000.5082 
.OOOr.741 
. 0005220 
.000.5515 
.0005297 


0.03718 
. 16691 
. 27086 
. 19092 
. 446(if) 
. 13589 
. 30680 
. 19075 
.36671 
. 28560 
.11780 
.09712 
. 14362 
. 24942 
.43679 
. 18831 
. 05807 
. 10(89 
. 18098 








1.97 


0. 0003948 


0. 12315 




:::::::::::::::::: 


2.16 

1.88 


. 0004538 
. 0003955 


. 25728 
. 06688 


1..55 
1.69 


.0003129 
. 0003485 


.09327 
. 19548 


2. 16 
1.95 
1.73 
1.65 
1.86 


. 0004478 
. 0003908 
.0003607 
.0003602 
. 0003926 


.08596 
.06487 
.09630 
. 19866 
. 26901 




..................... 


2.41 


. 0005037 


. 07554 


. 09307 

. 17948 

. 02824 

.22251 

. 45435 

.21399 

.11197 

.03223 

.07318 

.12989 

. 24303 

.4995 

. 28823 

. 29575 

.01649 

.31.842 

. 03660 

.09208 

. 244(i8 

.20170 

. 33923 

. 19943 

. 19936 

.15986 

. 20918 

. 08756 

. 221S4 

. 2S5ti9 

. 19388 

.41715 

.37548 

.21687 

.25162 

.03793 

. 23890 

.2.5616 

.11436 

.31492 

.07310 


2.45 


. 0a)5206 


.07081 




::::::::::::::: 


1.39 
1.84 
1.44 


. 0002933 
. 0003844 
. 0003014 


.11760 
. 39635 
. 13470 




::::::::::: ; 


1.29 
1..50 
1.99 
2.20 
1.96 
1.96 


. 0002625 
. 0003072 
. 0004036 
. 0004536 
.0004281 
. 0004263 


. 03255 
. 09645 
. 15857 
. 39272 
. 21400 
. 239.53 


1.64 


.0003357 


.20008 


2.20 
1.95 

2.18 


.0004402 
.0003916 
.0004519 


.07261 
.22828 
. 16714 














2.05 
1.77 
1.96 
2.03 


. 0004262 
. 0003832 
.0004128 
. 0004328 


. 19772 
. 27937 
. 19193 
.31248 




























.02085 


386.6 


8. 1267 


2.60 


.000.5422 


.20510 


1.92 


.0003999 


. 17351 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNi-:L, 0.022 TO 0.024 GRAM. 



17307 

17410 

20707 

21706 

21708 

21806 

21909 

21911 


0.02279 
.02285 
.02282 
.02390 
.02381 
. 02378 
.02317 
.02209 


138 
744 
444 
807 
390 
599 
525 
383 


3. 1454 
16.9987 

9.9070 
19.3318 

9.28.50 
14. 2450 
12. 1819 

8.4593 


3.46 
2.88 
2.77 
4.71 
2.33 
2.71 
4.43 
5.48 


0.0007886 
.0006580 
.0006181 
.0011283 
. 0005547 
.0006444 
. 0010265 
.0012103 


0. 10883 
. 48957 
.27443 
.91052 
.21634 
. 38604 
. 53889 
.46356 














1.85 


0. 0004222 


0. 18328 














1.98 


.0005677 


.29846 









70 



IMPROVING thp: quality of wheat. 



Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to weigld of average Tcernel. Crop of 

i^aS— Continued. 

WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, J.022 TO 0,024 GRAM— Continued. 



Record 
number. 



Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 



25206.... 
26106. . . . 
26805.... 
26807.... 
27506.... 
27508.... 
27509.... 
32605.... 
33407.... 
33605.... 

34207 

34606 

38.505. . . . 
38609. . . . 
42405. . . . 
43405.... 
48507.... 
55308. . . . 
55606.... 
56207.... 
56208.... 
57606.... 
57607.... 
63107.... 
65305.... 
69805.... 
71905.... 

72708 

73307.... 
73308. . . . 
81707.... 
81710.... 
88607.... 
91305.... 

Average 



0.02281 
.02304 
.02248 
.02390 
.02252 
. 02287 
. 02206 
. 02323 
.02271 
. 02345 
. 02219 
.02213 
.02252 
.02309 
.02251 
.02258 
.02296 
.02395 
.02205 
.02361 
. 02356 
.02333 
. 02234 
.02233 
.02310 
.02220 
.02239 
.02270 
. 02229 
.02291 
.02336 
.02308 
.02205. 
.02242 



Num- 
ber of 
Ivernels 



of kernels «' P"^i. 
on plant ^ej^m 

in ker- 
nels. : 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 



plant. (g'-^"i^>- 



.022&J 



205 

90 
220 
721 
444 
251 
243 
225 
305 
301 
611 
280 
563 
293 

66 
124 

70 
397 
503 
462 
563 
132 
736 
417- 

78 

110 

1,260 

398 



396 
234 
138 



4. 6754 

2.0737 

4.9456 

17.2324 

10.0005 

5. 5324 

5. 3615 

5. 2268 

7. 0889 

7.0596 

13.5.556 

6. 1962 

12. 1088 

6. 7665 

1.4892 

2.8000 

1.6036 

9. 5078 

11.0930 

10.9073 

13. 5720 

3.0790 

16.4433 

9.3120 

1.8018 

2.4420 

28. 2136 

9.0386 

. 5572 

14.2986 

18.3814 

9.1411 

5.1584 

3.0940 



2.76 
2.63 
2.81 
2.80 
2.70 
2.64 
2.90 
1.20 
1.62 
2.39 
2.84 
3.12 
3.61 
2.74 
3.07 
2.92 
2.64 
2.54 
2.58 
2.34 
2.61 
2.74 
1.73 
2.43 
4.92 
5.82 
2.47 
2.27 
2.39 
2.92 
2.34 
1.92 
2.61 
3.21 



Average 
kernel. 



0.0006295 
. 0006060 
.0006317 
.0006692 
.0006082 
.0006037 
.0006399 
.0002788 
.0003679 
.0005605 
.0006273 
.0006904 
.0007764 
.0006475 
.0006927 
.0006594 
.0006062 
. 0006225 
.0005690 
.0005.524 
.0003149 
. 0006391 
.0003865 
.0005426 
.0011365 
. 0012921 
. 0005531 
.0005154 
.0005327 
. 0006539 
. 0005466 
.000*432 
.0005754 
. 0007197 



Kernels 
on plant. 



Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in j 
kernels. I 



Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nlwogen 
(gram) in- 



Average 
kernel. 



Kernels 
on plant. 



0. 12904 
.05454 
. 13897 
.48250 
.27003 
. 14608 
. 15549 
.06272 
. 11223 
. 16872 
. 38.505 
. 19332 
: 43713 
.18540 
.04572 
.08176 
.04233 
. 24150 
.28580 
. 25.522 
.34616 
.08436 
. 248^7 
. 22628 
.088B5 
.14'>13 
.69^88 
.20^^18 
.01.332 
. 4r52 
.429n5 
. l''5.50 
. 13^63 
.09932 









1.98 0.00044,59 0.19800 
2.32 .000,5306 i .12835 
1.09 .0002405 , .0,5844 

i 


1 


1.92 .0004602 


.13554 






1.77 
1.34 


.0003986 
.0003094 


. 21432 
. 09067 


1.18 


.0002664 


. 03304 






1.49 
1.83 
1.95 


. (X)02609 
. (HM)4321 
.0004594 


.16529 
. 19960 
. 26465 
















1 . 94 . 0(H)4307 


. 047;-if< 






1 ■ 




■ 1 







2.90 



.0006624 



.25166 



1.74 I .0004011 



WEIGHT OF AVER.\GE KERNEL, 0.024 TO 0.026 GRAM. 



17506.... 
21807.... 
21906.... 
27206.... 
28805. . . . 
37905. . . . 
40505. . . . 
48305.... 
55907. . . . 
72706.... 
81708.... 
92206.... 
94105.... 

Average 



0.02460 


93 


.02498 


. 377 


.02.563 


408 


.02469 


777 


.02512 


87 


.02555 


37 


.02444 


170 1 


.02543 


473 


.02590 


749 


.02484 


591 


. 02578 


287 


.02407 


46 


. 02543 


22 ■ 



2. 2881 


3.52 


9. 4172 


2.73 


10.4800 


3.18 


19. 1854 


2.36 


2. 1851 


2.91 


.9452 


2.53 


4. 1546 


2.82 


12.0278 


2.87 


19.3966 


2.59 


14.6802 


3.86 


7.3993 


2.41 


1.1074 


2.67 


.5595 


2.67 


7. 9866 


2.86 



0. 0008660 
. 0006664 
.0008168 
. 0005827 
. 0007309 
. 0006463 
. 0006892 
. 0007299 
.0006707 
.0000.588 
.0006213 
. 0006428 
. 0OOB79O 



.0007154 



0.08044 
. 25709 
.33403 
.45276 
.06359 
.02391 
.11716 
.34.524 
. 50''38 
. 56666 
. 17833 
. 02957 
. 01494 



. 22816 



2.23 0.000,5486 
2. 11 : .000.5271 
2.10 ! .0a).5382 
1.46 I .0003605 
1.55 .0003894 



2.19 .000,5352 
1.77 .0004.501 
1.61 .0004170 



0.05102 
. 19870 
. 22008 
.28010 
. 03387 



.09099 
.21289 
.31229 



.0004228 .12135 



.0004654 .16903 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.026 GRAM AND OVER. 



21211 

21705 

39506 

49905 

55608 

55909 

57,508 

58505 

72405 

Average . 


0. 02806 
.02659 
.02869 
. 029,39 
.02699 
. 03050 
.03177 
.02730 
.03963 


10 
58 
67 
23 
837 
302 
380 
273 
213 


0.2806 

1.5420 

1.9218 

.6760 

22., 5848 
9.2120 

12.0728 
7.4516 
8. 4415 


3.15 
2.45 
2.93 
3.62 
2.31 
2.30 
2.21 
2.95 
3.36 


0.0008839 
.0006514 
.0008404 
.0010640 
. 0006236 
.OOu-016 
.0007021 
.0008052 
.0013316 


0.00884 
.03778 
.05631 
.02436 
.,52194 
.21187 
. 26680 
.21982 
.2&363 














2.06 


0.0005915 


0.03959 






1 


1.66 
2.05 


. 0005063 
.0006513 


. 15292 
. 24750 














.02988 


240.3 


7. 2425 


2.81 


.0008449 


. 18126 


1.92 


.0005829 


. 14667 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



71 



T.\BLE 11. — Siimmani of analyses of plants, arranged according to veight of average Icernel. 

Crop of 1903. 





Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses." 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber cf 
kernels 

219 

179 

155. 7 

232 

305.9 

349. 6 

386.6 

388.1 

316.7 

240.3 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels 
(grams). 

■ 
2. 0334 
2.0187 
2.0510 
3. 5480 
5.2055 
6. 6327 
8. 1257 
8. 8879 
7.9866 
7.2425 


Per- 
cent- 
age of 
pro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in- 


Per 
cent- 
age of 
glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen in 
ker- 
nels. 


Gliadin-plus- 
glutenin nitro- 
gen(gram)in— 


Range of 

weights of 

average kernel 

(gram). 


Average 
kernel. 


Ker- 
nels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Ker- 
nels. 


0.000 to 010.... 
0.010 to 0.012.... 
0.012 to 0.014.... 
0.014 to 0.016.... 
016 to 0.018.... 
O.OIS to 0.020.... 
0.020 to 0.022.... 
0.022 to 024.... 
024 to 026 ... 
0.026 and over.. 


4 

6 

19 

27 

69 

. 103 

64 

42 

13 

9 


0.00915 
.01118 
.01323 
. 01516 
.01709 
.01901 
.02085 
.02285 
.02511 
.02988 


2.76 
2.98 

3:12 

3.00 
2.93 
2.88 
2.60 
2.90 
2.86 
2.81 


0.0002628 
. 0003326 
.0004120 
.0004555 
.0005020 
. 0005476 
.0005422 
.0006624 
.0007154 
.0008449 


0. 05618 
. 06270 
. 06687 
. 10619 
. 14618 
. 18039 
.20510 
. 25166 
.22816 
. 18126 


1.97 
2.69 
1.98 
1.76 
2.07 
2.08 
1.92 
1.74 
1.85 
1.92 


0.0001877 
. 0002968 
.0002641 
.0002805 
. 0003519 
.0003979 
. 0003999 
.0004011 
. 0004654 
.0005829 


0.05312 
.067.-.2 
.07499 
.09320 
. 1354S 
. 15541 
. 17351 
. 15515 
. 16903 
. 14667 



With an increase in the weight of the kernel, as shown by this 
table, there is an irregular increase in the number of kernels on the 
plant up to a point somewhat bej'ond the kernel of average weight, 
after which there is a decrease. The weight of the kernels on the 
plant seems to follow the same rule. The percentage of proteid 
nitrogen in the kernels decreases, in general, with the weight of the 
average kernel, w^hile the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in 
the average kernel increases steadily. The grams of proteid nitro- 
gen in all the kernels on the plant increase up to the same point as 
do the number of kernels on the plant, and then decrease. 

Table 12 shows the summary of the analys^^s of the crop of 190.3, 
ananged according to the grams of proteid nitrogen in the average 
kernel. All plants 1 aving less than 0.0003 gram of proteid nitro- 
gen form the first class, and the following classes increase with each 
0.0001 gram of proteid nitrogen. 

It is difficult to trace any relation between the grams of proteid 
nitrogen in thy aveiage kernel and tiie number of kernels on the plant, 
or the weight of the kernels on the plant. The weight of tlie average 
kernel increases directly with the grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
kernel. The percentage of proteid nitrogen increases regularly 
with an increase in the grams of proteid nitrogen in the average 
kernel. The grams of proteid nitrogen in all the kernels on the plant 
show no definite relation to the grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
average kernel. 

It becomes evident from these results that selection of large, 
heavy kernels for seed would result in discarding the immature 
and unsound kernels, but that there would also be discarded many 
sound kernels, which, although small and of low specific gravii}^, 
would contain a high percentage of proteids. 



72 



IMPROVIiSTG THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Another effect of such selection, as indicated by the foregoing 
results, would be to increase the yield of grain from each plant 
when grown under the conditions that obtained in these experi- 
ments. What the effect would be upon the yield under ordinary 
field conditions these experiments do not indicate. 

On the other hand, selection based upon percentage of proteid 
nitrogen alone would not result in securing plants of greatest yield 
when raised under these conditions. It w^ould, moreover, not result 
in obtaining plants producing the greatest amount of proteid nitro- 
gen, nor even of kernels containing the largest quantity of proteid 
nitrogen. 

Table 12. — Summa}'y of analyses of plants, arranged according to grains of proteid nitrogen 
in average kernel. Crop of 1903. 



Range of proteid nitrogen in 
average kernel (gram). 



Below 0.00030... 
0.00030 to 00040 
0.0004(1 to (1(1(1.50 
0.f«K).".() to (I (IIKlBO 
O.OOoco to (I (10070 
0.0(1(17(1 to (I (1(1080 
(KKINO to (1 (111090 
0,00000 to 0,00100 
0.00100 and over. 



Num- 



Proteid 

nitrogen ^ ^ 

m average "^J' 

kernel : '^"^^^ 

(gram). ^'^^^ 



0. 0002509 


14 


.0003602 


42 


. 0004537 


80 


. 0005406 


116 


. 0006409 


59 


. 0007430 


24 


. 0008538 


9 


. 0009588 


1 


.0011578 


11 



Number 


Weight ( 
of 


in grams) 


Percent- 
age of 


of ker- 






proteid 






nels on 
plant. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


257.9 


3.9190 


0.01364 


1.96 


266.7 


4. 6742 


.01628 


2.31 


409.2 


7. .5309 


.01811 


2.54 


341.5 


6. 7159 


.01908 


2.86 


310.3 


6. 7257 


.02137 


3.07 


204.9 


4. 5158 


.02110 


3.66 


189.1 


4.2480 


.02334 


3.79 


591.0 


14. 6802 


.02484 


3.86 


244.9 


6. 6082 


.02875 


4.62 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 



0. 06531 
.09644 
.18644 
. 18440 
. 19805 
.15318 
. 15944 
. 56666 



It will be shown later that the determination of gliadin-plus-glutenin 
nitrogen is a safer guide to the bread-making value of wheat than is 
a determination of proteid nitrogen, but whether selection should be 
based upon the percentage of nitrogen or the total production of 
nitrogen by the plant, or upon the amount contained in the average 
kernel, is a question that can not be solved except by trial under field 
conditions. 

Some results of exj^eriments with light and with heavy seed con- 
ducted on large field plots for several j^ears may throw some light 
on this subject, and are given herewith. 

YIELD OF NITROGEN PER ACRE. 

It is important to know whether the absolute amount of nitro- 
gen per acre of grain raised is greater in light or in heavy wheat. 

If the absolute amount of nitrogen per acre is less in light than 
in heavy wheat the supposition would be justifiable that the kernels 
were immature or had been prematurely checked in their develop- 
ment. On the other hand, if the amount of nitrogen per acre is 
greater in the light wheat it would be reasonable to suppose that, as 
both had been raised under the same conditions, the light wheat had, 
in part at least, come from plants that possessed greater ability to 
acquire and elaborate nitrogenous material. 



YIELD OF NITROGEN PER ACRE. 



73 



To afford information on this point anah^ses were made of crops 
grown from light and from heavy seed. Records of the yields of the 
jilots were kept in each case so that the actual amount of proteid 
nitrogen contained in an acre of each kind of wheat can he calculated. 
The number of grams of proteid nitrogen in 1 ,000 kernels of each seed 
and crop sample is also stated. The fii'st samples separated, Nos. 78 
and 79 of the Turkish Red variety and 80 and 81 of the Big Frame 
variety, were taken from seed that had never before been treated 
in this way. When planted they produced the crops indicated in 
Table 13 by 78b, 79b, 80b, and 81b, respectively. Each of these 
crops w^as then separated into tw^o portions, of which the light portion 
of the light wheat was re tamed for analyzing and planting, and the 
heavy portion of the heavy wheat likewise retained. Thus No. 383 
is the light portion of No. 78b, and No. 384 is the heavy portion of 
No. 79b. 

The accuracy of the records of relative yields of light and heavy 
seed harvested in 1902 l)eing open to suspicion, samples of the same 
seed were sown again in the autumn of 1902 and harvested in 1903. 
The results from this test are stated at the bottom of the table under 
the heading ''Check experiment." 

These experiments are to be understood as duplicating those of 
1902, which, as regards the relative yield of light and heavy wheat, 
should be accurate, although tried in 1903. The difference between 
this check experiment and the regular one of 1903 is that in the 
check experiment the seed of the crop of 1901 was used, while in the 
regular experiment in 1903 the seed of the crop of 1902 was used. 

Table 13. — Crops grown fvoin light and from heavy seed, for four years. 
SEED. 



Farm 
num- 
ber. 


Variety. 


Percentage ol 


- 


Weight of 
1,000 ker- 
nels, 
(grams). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in 1,000 
kernels 
(gram). 




Total Proteid 
nitrogen. ' nitrogen. 


Non- 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Relative 
weight. 


78 


Turkish Red 






17.24 
30.63 
15.57 
28.56 
27.11 
28.47 
27.11 
28.09 




Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavy. 

Light 


79 


.do ! i --1 




80 

81 

383 


Big Frame 

do 

Turkish Red 


2.45 2.00 
2.20 1.96 

3. 12 3. 10 
3. 02 2. 93 

3.13 2.82 
2.95 2.65 


0.45 
.24 
.02 
.09 
.31 
.30 


0. 3120 
.5606 
.8401 
.8350 
.7642 
.7446 


384 
385 


do 

Big Frame 


386 


.do . 




Turkish Red 




do 








Big Frame . ' ! 






do -- 






957 


Turkish Red 


3. 33 2. 87 


.46 
.20 
.25 






956 


do 

Big Frame 

do 


3.06 
2.88 


2.86 
2.63 






952 




953 






Heavy. 
Light 




CHECK EXPERIMENT. 

Turkish Red 












do 






Heavy. 










Light. 




do 






Heavy. 




1 1 









74: 



IMPROVING THE QUALITA' OF WHEAT. 



Table 13. — Crops grown from light and from heavy seed for four years — Continued. 

CROP. 



c 


Variety. 


SI'S 


.Q'm 

KB 

-P o 

^ p. 


Percentage of— 


Proteid nitrogen 
per acre (pounds). 


Weight of 1,000 
kernels (grams). 


si 

Ph 


OS 


o 


o 

S 


.2 

a 


o 

•a 

2i 
2 


13 

'S . 

O 05 

!h bij 

1^2 

S-a 


Ed 
3 O 
=:& 

03 


78 


Turkish Red 

do 

Big Frame 

do 

Turkish Red 

do 


23.0 
29.5 
20.5 
25.1 
26.7 
29.3 
21.2 
27.7 
19.7 
18.0 
Lost,. 
Lost. 

25.6 
21.3 

25.8 
20.8 

30.9 
31.8 
23.9 
24.2 


'm.h' 

61.5 
58.0 
60.5 
57.0 
58.0 


3.20 
3.08 
3.13 
2.81 
2.35 
2.11 
3.30 
2.46 
2.15 
1.98 
3.54 
2.44 


3.09 
2.94 
3.06 
2.59 
2.13 
1.94 
3.06 
2.24 
2.14 
1.87 
3.32 
2. 21 

3. 51 
2.18 
2.14 
1.98 

1.95 
1.64 
1.79 
1.62 


0.11 
.14 
.07 
.22 
.22 
.17 
.24 
.22 
.01 
.11 
.22 
.23 


45.54 
52.04 
37.63 
39.01 
34.12 
34.11 
38.92 
37.22 
25.29 
20.20 

53.91 
27.86 
33. 13 
24.71 

36.34 
31.29 
25.67 
23.52 






1900 
1900 
1900 
1900 
1901 
1901 
1901 
1901 
1902 
1902 
1902 
1902 

1903 
1903 
1903 
1903 

190i 
190:! 
1903 
1903 


78b 


79 
80 


25.16 


0. 7379 


79b 
80b 


81 
383 
384 


24.84 
26. 19 
27.04 
23.89 

28.82 


.6423 
. 5581 
. 5238 
.7409 
.6451 


81b 
612 
613 


385 




602 


386 


do 


603 




Turkish Red 

do 

Big Frame 


621 








614 




19.56 
26.41 

22.12 
23.13 
19.82 
23.26 


.6494 
.5837 

.7764 

.5042 

• .4241 

. 4605 


604 




do 

Turkish Red 

do 

Big Frame 

do 

CHECK EXPERISIENT. 

Turkish Red 

do 




611 


957 




1240 


956 






1239 


952 






1248 


953 






12^9 








1245 












1243 








12.'': 




do 











12.-4 











Comparing the analyses of the Hght and heavy seed in this table 
with those in the preceding tables, it will be noticed that the total 
and proteid nitrogen are both uniformly higher in the light seed. 
The nonproteid nitrogen is not so uniform as in the previous analyses, 
but the general tendency is the same. 

In the crop the high total and proteid nitrogen of the light seed is 
uniformly transmitted. There is no uniformity in the nonproteid 
nitrogen. As was to be expected, the heavy seed produced in the 
first two years the largest yields per acre. The quality of light or 
heavy weight as indicated in the resulting crop b}^ weight of grain 
per bushel gave some indication of being transmitted. In 1900 
there was an absence of data on the subject, but in 1901 the heavy 
seed in each case produced grain having a greater weight per bushel 
than did the light seed. 

Turning to the column showing the absolute amount of prot'.'id 
nitrogen produced per acre, it is verv apparent that the heavy seed 
produced in 1900 considerably larger amounts of proteid nitrogen 
per acre than did the light seed, but in 1901 the difference was very 
slightl}^ in favor of the light wheat, which advantage continued 
with the light wheat during the remaining years. 



YIELD OF NITROUEN PER ACRE. 75 

It would seem from these results that the quality of lightness, 
with its correlated qualities of high total and proteid nitrogen, is 
hereditary. The question then arises, Why should the light wheat 
accumulate more nitrogen per acre than the heavy wheat after the 
fu'st generation ? 

A possible explanation for this is t^'at the light seed from the first 
generation contained kernels whos? lightness was due in some cases 
to immaturit}^, and in other cases to the individual peculiarity of the 
plant on which they grew. The latter class transmitted this pecul- 
iarity in the crop, while the former became less conspicuous with 
each generation, on account of the lesser vitality and productiveness 
of the immature seed. 

A peculiar feature of these results is found in the fact that the 
yield of grain from the light seed approaches each succeeding year 
more nearly in quantity to that obtained from the heavy seed until, 
in 1903, it becomes greater. These two qualities of seed were 
raised on plots side by side, and every precaution was taken to obtain 
an accurate estimate of the yield of each. While it is probable that 
the results for 1903 are misleading, it is certainly significant that so 
little difference in yield exists after three years' selection in this way. 
Instead of the difference between the light and heav}'^ seed becoming 
greater each year it is without doubt becoming less. 

In considering the relative yields of the light and lieav}^ wheat, it 
must be borne in mind that the seeding was done with a drill set to 
deliver Ih busliels per acre of ordinary seed wheat. The result 
would be to deposit a larger number of kernels of light seed per acre 
than of heav}' seed. In a season like that of 1903, when the rainfall 
was large and the weather moderately cool until harvest, there 
might be an advantage resulting fi-om the thicker seeding, which 
ma}" account for the greater yield from the light seed in that year. 

It is possible that the same cause may have operated in other 
years to increase the jdelds from the light seed, but it is not likely 
that it produced a very marked effect, because the seeding was a large 
one for Nebraska, and, the wheat being sown in the early fall, tliere 
was abundant opportunity for it to stool, and thus equalize the stand. 
It has never been observed that there was any difference between 
the plots in this respect. 

Taking, together, the results of 1902, which show a decrease in 
the weight of the kernels on a single head as the content of proteid 
nitrogen increases, the results of 1903, which show a slight decrease 
in the weight of the kernels from the plant, accompanying an increase 
in the percentage of proteid nitrogen, and the yields of the light and 
heavy seed for the four years beginning with 1900, there would 
appear to be a slight decrease in yield of grain, accompanying an 
increase in the percentage of proteid nitrogen. This loss in ^^eld is 



76 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

not sufficient to counteract tlie increase in nitrogen, and the result 
is to increase the production of proteids per acre. 

Viewed in the hght of these various experiments, the selection of 
large, heavy wheat kernels for seed does not appear to be altogether 
unobjectionable, as in this case it resulted in a decreased production of 
proteids per acre, without a compensating increase in the yield of grain, 
when continued for a numbei of 3'ears. On the other hand, the selec- 
tion of the small, light seed is hardly to be recommended. In fact, 
selection based upon kernel size or weight is not a satisfactor}^ method 
for permanently improving wheat, The individual plant should be 
taken as the basis for selection, and very large numbers should be 
handled. The figures in Table 8 show what great opportunity there 
is for securing not only kernels of high nitrogen content, but also 
plants giving at the same time an increased yield of grain and abun- 
dant production of proteids. If the average nitrogen content and 
yield of grain by plants be observed in this table, it will be seen 
that numerous plants may be selected that have not only a nitrogen 
content above the average, but also a greater yield of grain. While, 
therefore, it is probable that improvement in yield of grain can not 
be effected so rapidly where it is combined with improvement in 
nitrogen content as if the latter were neglected, yet present yields 
of wheat in Nebraska can be increased at the same time that the 
production of proteids is augmented. 

METHOD FOR SELECTION TO INCREASE THE QUANTITY OF 
PROTEIDS IN THE KERNEL. 

The following tables show the results of analyses of a total of 
forty-eight spikes of wheat. In the case of each spike one row of 
spikelets, for instance, row No. 1, was analyzed, and the other row 
of spikelets, which would then be row No. 2, was analj^zed sepa- 
rately. In the case of the set of spikes forming Table 14 the total 
organic nitrogen was determined in both lots, and in the set com- 
prised by Table 15 the proteid nitrogen was determined. The last 
column shows the difference between the nitrogen content of the two 
rows of kernels. 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



77 



Table 14. — Analyses of twenty-Jive spikes of wheat, shoiviny their total organic nitrogen. 



Numl;er of spike. 


Percentage of total organic 
nitrogen. 


Number of .spike. 


Percentage of total organic 
nitrogen. 


1 
Row 1. Row 2. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Row 1. 


Row 2. 


Differ- 
ence. 


1 


3.14 3.32 
2.97 I 3.15 


0.18 
.18 
.10 
.22 
.07 
.01 
.26 
.02 
.07 
.04 
.06 
.19 
.13 
.22 


18 


2.83 

2.78 


2.79 
2.76 


0.04 


2 


22 


.02 


3 


2.89 
2.99 
2.89 
2.82 
2.. 50 
3.13 
3.11 
2.76 
2.85 
3.26 
2.94 
3.45 


2.99 
3.21 
2.82 
2.81 
2.76 
3.11 
3.18 
2.80 
2.79 
3.07 
3.07 
3.67 


23 

24 

44 


2.94 1 3.03 
2.98 ; 2.89 
3.00 3.08 
2.84 2.(17 
3.03 1 2.90 
2.(15 1 2.79 
2.62 2.&i 
• 3.02 3.18 
3.02 2.80 


.09 




.09 


8 


.OS 


9 


45 

46 


.17 


10 


.13 


11 


47 

48 

49 


.14 


12 . 


90 


13 


.16 


14 


50 


.22 




Average 




16 






.12 


17 















Table 15. — Analyses of twenty-three sjnkes of xcheat, showing tJieir percentage of proteid 

nitrogen. 



Numlier of spike. 


Percentage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Number of spike. 

i 


•Percentage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Row 1. j Row 2. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Row 1. 


Row 2. 


Differ- 
ence. 


4 1 2.90 3.12 


0.22 
.11 
.11 
.22 
.11 
.08 
.10 
.36 
.03 
.05 
.17 
.12 
.04 


34 


2.86 
2.33 
2.88 
2.43 


3.02 
2.52 
2.85 
2.45 
3.14 
3.34 
2.59 
2.68 
3.61 
2.57 


0.16 


5 

20 

21... 


2.97 
2.68 
2.54 
2.42 
2.42 
3.01 
2.35 
2.72 
2.49 
2.92 
2.60 
3.41 


2.86 
2.79 
2.76 
2.53 
2.50 
2.91 
2.71 
2.75 
2.44 
3.09 
2.48 
3.37 


1 35 

36 

37 . . . 


.19 
.03 
.02 


25 


38 3.15 

39 3.46 

40 2.45 

41 2.73 

42 3.42 

43 2.47 


.01 


26 . 


.12 


27 

28 

29 


.14 

.05 
.19 


.30 


.07 


31 

32 .- 








2.77 


2.82 


.11 


33 















It will readily be seen that the analyses of the rows agree very 
closely, the extreme difference being 0.22 per cent, and the average 
dift'erence being 0.12 per cent, in the total nitrogen. If, therefore, 
one row of spikelets were to be used for seed and the other were 
analyzed, it is quite evident that a very accurate estimate of the 
nitrogen content of the kernels used for seed would be obtained. In 
the determination of proteid nitrogen there is an extreme difference 
of 0.36 per cent in one case, but in the main the differences are small. 
As will be shown later, the variation in the proteid nitrogen content 
of individual plants is so great that even this maximum difference 
would cause no confusion when selecting plants for reproduction. 

It is very desirable to have for anah^sis a larger sample than can 
be obtained from one spike. It has therefore been attempted to 
ascertain whether a sample consisting of one-half the whole number 
of spikes on a plant would afford a fair estimate of the composition 
of the other kernels on the remainder of the spikes. The plants 
whose spikes were analyzed were grown in hills 5 inches apart 



78 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT, 



each way, with one seed in each hill. Each plant was harvested 
separatel}^ and the spikes from each placed in a separate envelope. 
The following table gives the results, lot 1 in each case being com- 
posed of the kei-nels from one-half the number of spikes on a plant, 
and lot 2 of kernels from the remaining spikes. 

Table 16. — Analy.'ies of twenty-one plants, showim/ total mtrogen and proteid nitrogen. 



Number of plant. 


Percentage of total nitrogen. 


Percentage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Lot 1. 


Lot 2. ^^ 


Lot 1. 


. _. „ Difler- 


1 


2.65 
3.01 
3.01 
2.82 
3.06 
2.94 
2.84 
3.21 
2.98 
2.59 
2.81 
3.47 
2.61 
2.54 
2.71 
2.85 
2.99 
2.78 
. 2.78 
2.79 


2.91 
3.02 
2.83 
3.10 
2.97 
2.56 
3.03 
3.05 
2.87 
2.66 
2.62 
3.62 
2.54 
2.46 
2.87 
3.01 
3.13 
2.77 
2.80 
2.71 


0.26 
.0] 
.24 
.28 
.09 
.38 
.19 
.16 
.11 
.07 
.19 
.15 
.07 
.08 
.16 
.16 
.14 
.01 
.02 
.08 


2.51 
2.77 
2.69 
2.63 
2.92 
2.51 
2.66 
2.83 
2.59 
2.34 
2.59 
3.04 
2.44 
2.25 
2.25 
2.73 
2.85 
2.61 
2.60 
2.51 


2. 69 ' 0. 18 


2 

3 

4 

5 


2.76 
2.57 
2.83 
2.70 
2.42 
2.86 
2.84 
2.70 
2. .57 
2.52 


.01 
.12 
.20 
.22 
.09 
.20 
.01 
.11 
.23 
.07 


6 

7 .... 


9 

10 

11 


12 


13 


3.35 ! .31 
2.42 1 .02 
2.29 1 .04 
2.71 1 .46 
2.75 .02 
2.91 .06 
2.33 .28 
2.57 .03 
2.48 .03 


14 


15 .... 


16 


17 


18 


19 


20 


21 




i 


.14 






.13 1 











The above table shows a maximum difference of 0.38 per cent in 
the content of total nitrogen of the two lots of spikes from one plant, 
and of 0.46 per cent in the content of proteid nitrogen. The aver- 
age dift'erence is only 0.14 per cent and 0.13 per cent, respectively. 

These tables give unmistakable evidences that the average com- 
position of a spike of wheat may be judged from the analysis of a 
row of its spikelets, and that the average composition of all of the 
spikes of a wheat plant is shown by an analysis of one-half the num- 
ber. In practice it is better to take as the sample for analysis one 
row of spikelets from each spike, and the remaining row of spikelets 
from each spike for planting. 

In order to ascertain what variation occurs between the several 
spikes on a single wheat plant, anal3"ses were made of each spike 
from a number of plants. On some plants there were more spikes 
than on others, but every spike on each plant was analyzed. In the 
following tabulation of these analyses the percentage of proteid 
nitrogen is stated. 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



79 



Table 17. — Analyses of sjnkes of wheat, shoiving difference in proteid nitrogen. 



Spike. 




Percentage oi proteid nitrogen. 




Plant 23. 


Plant 24. 


Plant 25. 


Plant 26. 


Plant 27. 


Plant 29. 


1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 




2.33 

2. (i9 
2.37 
2.36 
2.15 
2.31 
2.09 
2.71 
2.32 
2.37 


2.46 
2.73 
2.35 
2.11 
2.19 
2.21 
2.. 53 


2.31 
2.36 
2.47 
2.59 
2.35 
2.39 
2.39 
2.60 
2. 54 
2.83 


2.73 
3.02 
2.80 
2.60 
2.53 
2.37 
2.72 
2.37 
2.61 
2.45 


3.22 
3.24 
3.02 
3.31 


2.38 
2.60 
3.03 
3.00 
2.34 
2.71 
2.21 










ti. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 




















2. CO 
2.30 








Maximum 

Average 

Minimum 

Greatest dif- 
ference 






2.69 
2.37 
2.09 

.60 


2.73 
2.37 
2.11 

. 62 


2.83 
2.48 
2.31 

.52 


3.02 
2.62 
2.37 

.65 


3.31 
3.20 
3.02 

.29 


3.03 
2.57 
2.21 

.82 



These results show that there may be large differences between 
the proteid nitrogen content of spikes on the same plant. They do 
not, however, indicate that the determination of the average com- 
position of the kernels on a plant is not a safe guide for selecting 
breeding stock. If the plant is the unit in reproduction, whether the 
plant reproduces itself from one seed or another does not affect its 
hereditary qualities in ver}^ marked degree. 

It is evident, from a comparison of the variations that occur in the 
composition of the spikes from a single plant, and of the kernels on a 
single spike, that it is impossible to do more than obtain a reasonably 
close estimate of the composition of the kernels either on a part or on 
the whole of a plant. It therefore becomes desirable to obtain as 
closely as possible the average composition of the unit of reproduction. 
If the plant as a whole, and not any particular part, is this unit, the 
average composition of all of the kernels on the plant is a much safer 
guide as a basis for selection than is the average composition of the 
kernels of any part of it. One row of spikelets from each spike 
should therefore give the best sample for analysis. 

In Table 18 is given a statement of the percentage of proteid 
nitrogen in the dry matter of the kernels on a row of spikelets of 800 
spikes of wheat of the Turkish Red variety. These spikes were taken 
from a field of wheat, and were selected with reference to length of 
head, plumpness of kernel, uprightness of straw, freedom from rust, 
etc. They are therefore not spikes in which high nitrogen content is 
likely to be due to immaturity or arrested development." Variations 
in the nitrogen content of different plants may in some degree be due 
to a larger or smaller supply of available nitrogen, although all were 
taken from the same field. Variations due to climate are, of course, 
precluded, as all grew during the same season. 

« In practice undeveloped kernels are discarded. 



80 



IMPKOVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 18. — Variations in content of proteids. 



Percentage of — 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material 



Proteids 
(proteid 

N.X5.7). 



2.25 
3.04 
2.45 
3.14 
2.86 
2.83 
3.67 
3.42 
2.36 
2.28 
2.98 
3.51 
3.63 
2.48 
2.30 
3.48 
3.55 
3.31 
2.30 
2.52 
2.93 
3.25 



2.84 
2.73 
3.55 
2.33 
2.65 
2.82 
2.70 
1.84 
3.10 
2.86 
2.16 
2.58 
3.22 
3.49 
2.76 
2.96 
2.86 
3.50 
3.05 
2.88 
2.75 
2.61 
2.50 
3.10 
3.17 
2.86 
2.80 
3.65 
2.88 
3.21 
2.96 
3.84 
3.38 
3.11 
3.21 
3.06 
3.02 
1.78 
2.67 
3.39 
2.49 
2. .58 
2.12 
2.64 
2.46 
2.35 
2.93 
2.32 
2.20 
2. .58 
2. .58 
3.22 



12.82 
17.33 
13.96 
17.90 
16.30 
16.13 
20.92 
19.49 
13.45 
13.00 
16.99 
20.01 
20.69 
14.14 
13.11 
19.84 
20.23 
18.87 
13.11 
14.36 
16.70 
18.52 



Record 
number. 



16.19 
15.56 
20.23 
13.28 
15.11 
16.07 
15.39 
10.49 
17.67 
16.30 
12.31 
14.71 
18.35 
19.89 
15.73 
16.87 
16.30 
19.95 
17.38 
16.42 
15.67 
14.88 

14. 25 
17.67 
18.07 
16.30 
15. 96 
20.80 
16.42 
18.30 
16.87 
21.89 
19.27 
17.73 
18.30 
17.44 
17.21 
10.13 
15.22 
19.32 
14.19 
14.71 
12.08 
15.05 
14.02 
13.39 
16.70 
13. 22 
12.54 
14.71 
14.71 

15. 35 



Percentage of — 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 



Proteids 
(proteid 

N. X 5.7). 



78 


3.40 
3.33 
3.79 
3.63 
2.68 


19.38 
18.98 
21.60 
20.69 
15.28 


79 


80 


81 


82 


83 ' 


84 


2.46 
2.62 
2.87 
2.89 
2.44 
3. 56 
3.76 


14.02 
14. 93 
16.49 
16.86 
13.91 
20.29 
21.43 


85 


86 


87 


88 


89 


90 


91 


92 


3.41 
2.30 


19.44 
13.11 


93 


94 


95 






96 


2.75 
4.07 
3.28 
3.24 
2.15 
3.12 
3.00 
2.87 
3.58 
2.61 
2.01 
2.68 
3.10 
2.58 
2.76 
4.30 
2.89 
2.59 
2.68 
1.71 
2. .59 
3.31 


15.67 
23.20 
18.70 
18.47 
12.25 
17.78 
17.10 
16.36 
20.41 
14.88 
11.46 
15.28 
17.67 
14.71 
15.73 
24.51 
16.47 


97 


98 


99 


100 


101 

102 

103 

104 

105 

106 

107 


108 

109 


110 


111 


112 


113 . ... 


14.67 


114 


15.28 


115 . ... 


9.75 


116 


14.75 


117 


18.87 


118 




119 


2.17 
2.88 


12.37 


120 


16.42 


121 




122 


1.33 

2.54 
3.20 
2.04 
2.34 
2.89 
2.98 
2.85 
2.99 
3.18 


7.58 


123 


14.48 


124 


18.24 


125 


11.63 


126 


13.34 


127 


16.47 


128 


16.99 


129 


16.24 


130 - . 


17.04 


131 


18.13 


132 . . 




133 






134 . - 






135 






136 






137 


2.13 
3.08 
1.37 


12.14 


138 


17.56 


139 


7.81 


140 




141 

142 


2. .57 
2.75 
3.03 
3.17 
2.09 
2.75 
2.42 
2.68 
2.25 
2.61 
1..51 
1.64 
2.93 
! 2.85 


14.65 
15.67 


143 


17.27 


144 


18.07 


145 


11.91 


146 

147 


15.67 
13.79 


148 


15.28 


149 . . 


12.82 


150 

151 

152 


14.88 
8.61 
9.35 


1.53 


16.70 


154 


16.24 



Record 
number. 



155... 
156... 
157... 
158... 
159... 
160... 
161... 
162... 
163... 
164... 
165... 
166... 
167... 
168... 
169... 
170... 
171... 
172... 
173... 
174... 
175... 
176... 
177... 
178... 
179... 
180... 
181... 
182... 
183... 
184... 
185... 
186... 
187... 



189.. 

190.. 

191.. 

192.. 

193.. 

194.. 

195.. 

196.. 

197.. 

198.. 

199.. 

200., 

201. 

202. 

203. 

204. 

205. 

206. 

207. 

208. 

209. 

210. 

211. 

212. 

213. 

214. 

215. 

216. 

217. 

218. 

219. 

220 

221. 

222. 

223. 

224. 

225. 

226. 

227. 

228. 

229. 

230. 

231. 



Percentage of — 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 



1.99 
3.03 
2.07 

2.75 
2.82 
3.06 
2.54 
3.33 
2.73 
2.47 
3.22 
2.80 



Proteids 
(proteid 

N. x5.7). 



3.59 
2.52 
2.72 
3.28 
2.74 
3.07 
3.75 
3.46 
3.09 
3.56 



3.85 
3. .57 
2.66 
2.76 
2.05 
3.. 77 
2.70 
3.97 
2.98 
2.36 
2.63 
3.24 
3.24 
3.12 
2.40 
3.43 
3.33 
2.71 
2.85 
3.18 
2.98 
3.23 



3.12 
3.07 
3.90 
2.41 
3.44 
2.73 
3.20 
3.81 
2.94 
2.89 
2.96 
3. .30 
3.09 
3.79 
3.33 
2.86 
2.58 
2.71 
3.19 
3.98 
2.93 
3.30 
3.65 
3.54 
3.11 
2.71 
3.39 
2.96 
2. 54 
3.11 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



81 



Table 18. — Variations in content of proteids — Continued. 





Percentage of— 


Record 

number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 

number. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N.x 5.7). 

17.73 
18.92 
18. 43 
20.82 
18.17 
27.79 
15.38 
14.77 
20.12 
15.75 
16.89 
19.78 
18.83 
20.77 
21.39 
19.95 
20.78 
18.32 
17.76 
19.73 
14.52 
20.71 

17.' 26 

18.88 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 

N.x 5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N..X 5.7). 


232 


3.11 
3.31 
3.23 
3.65 
3.18 
4.87 
2.69 

2. 59 

3. 52 
2.76 
2.96 
3.47 
3.30 
3.64 
3.75 
3.50 
3.64 
3.21 
3.11 
3.46 
2.54 
3.63 

3.' 62' 

3.31 


309 


3.74 
3.15 
2.99 
3.48 
3.52 
3.16 
2.75 
3.35 
3.42 
2.01 
2.86 
2.98 
3.42 
2.54 
3.42 
3.18 
3.45 


21.36 1 
18.01 
■ 17.07 
19.88 
20.11 
18.03 
15.68 
19.13 
19.54 i 
11.50 ! 
16.33 
17.00 
19.54 
14.53 
19.54 
18.16 
19.70 


386..- 

387 

388 


2.52 
2.73 
3.05 
2.95 
3.22 
3.26 
2.93 
2.70 
2.77 
2.98 
2.28 


15.07 


233 


310 


15. 59 


234 


311 


17.41 


235 


312 


389 


16.87 


236 


313 


390 

391 

392 

393 

394 

395 


18. 36 


237 


314.. 


18.60 


238 


315 


16.74 


239 


316. 


15.41 


240 


317 


15.81 


241 


318 


16.99 


242 


319. . 


396 

397 


13. 02 


243 


320 




244 


321. 


398. 




245 


322 


399 

400 

401 

402 

403 

404 

405 


3.09 
3. .-5 
3.36 
2.32 
3.03 
3.30 
3.75 
2.43 
3.79 
3.63 
3.59 
3.26 
3.15 


17 65 


246. 


323 


19.12 


247 


324 


19.20 


248. 


325 


13.26 


249 


326 


17.31 


250 


.327 


3.44 
3.60 

2.87 
2.61 


19.64 
20. 55 
16.39 
14.93 


18.83 


251 


328. . . . 


21. 43 


252 


329 


406 

407 

408 

409 


13. 90 


253 


330. . 


21 63 


254 


331 


20.74 


255 


332 


2.57 
3.25 
2.61 
2.81 
3.35 
2.88 
4.95 
3. S3 
2.73 
2.97 
2.60 
2.50 
2.93 
2.55 
2.55 
2.44 
2.87 
2.65 
2.63 
3.31 
3.04 
3.10 
2.72 
2.83 
2.91 
2.36 
2.33 
2.97 
2.88 
2.94 
3.03 
3.49 
2.91 
3.49 
3.16 
3.37 
3.06 
3.33 
3.09 
2.98 
3.30 
2.86 
3.15 
3.40 
2.59 
3.46 
2.74 
3.09 
2.35 
3.45 
3.22 
2.96 
3.55 
3.79 


14.68 
18.56 
14.92 
15.70 
19.11 
16.45 
28.23 
19.01 
15.61 
16.94 
14.82 
14.27 
16.71 
14.57 
14. 55 
13.92 
16.39 
15. 18 
15.03 
18.90 
17.38 
17.72 
15. 53 
16.18 
16.61 
13.47 
13.60 
16.95 
16.45 
16.77 
17.28 
19.89 
16.62 
19.94 
18. 04 
19. 23 
17.47 
19.02 
17.64 
17.04 
18.84 
16. 33 
17.97 
19.89 
14.76 
19.76 
15.65 
17.64 
13. 42 
19.67 
18.40 
16.88 
20. 26 
21.62 


20 47 


256 

257 


333 

334 


410 

411 

412 

413 

414 

415 


18. 63 

1 7. 95 


258 


3.37 
3.84 
1.93 
3.49 
3.19 
3.24 
3.36 
3.29 
3.10 
3.18 
4.10 
3.20 
3.36 
3.39 
3.13 
3.39 
3.56 
3.32 
3.15 
2.85 
3.11 
3.78 
■ 3.70 
3.26 
3.01 
3. 85 
3.71 
3.87 
3.55 
3.86 
2.82 
2.52 
4.00 
2.23 
4.15 
2.63 
2. ,56 
3.05 
3.93 
1.99 

3."67" 

3.06 
3.08 
2.68 



2.' 23' 

3.07 
2.50 
3.19 

2.84 


19.24 
21.89 
11.03 
19.92 
18.21 
18.48 
19.20 
18.80 
17.70 
18.18 
23.39 
18.29 
19.19 
19.34 
17.88 
19.78 
20.34 
18. 96 
17.95 
16.26 
17.77 
21.60 
21.10 
18.60 
17.19 
22.00 
21.20 
22.07 
20.26 
22.04 
16.09 
14.40 
22.81 
12.73 
23.68 
15. 04 
14.60 
17.41 
22.44 
11.35 

26." 96 

17.49 
17.61 
15.28 

i2.'74 

17.52 
14.30 
18.20 
16.22 


335 


3 63 1 20 70 


259 


336 


3.77 1 21.51 


260 


337 


3.13 
2.44 
3.23 
3.79 


17.89 


261 


338 


13.93 


262 


339 


416 

417 

418 

419 

420 

421 

422 

42^ 

424 

425 


18.44 


263 


340. . 


91 fi.5 


264 


341 


3.05 I 17.39 


265... 


342 


2.85 '' 16.28 


266 


343 


3 73 1 21 27 


267 


344 


2.53 ! 14.45 


268 


345 


3.53 20.12 


269 


1 346 


3.14 17.90 


270. 


! 347 


2.61 ; 14.93 


271 


348 . . 


3 29 IS 81 


272 


349 


426 

427 

428 

429 

4.-0 

431 

432 

433 

434 

435 

436 

437.. 


3.08 
3.06 
2.59 
3.03 
2.81 
3.20 
3.00 
3.12 
2.85 
3.53 
2.88 
3.12 
2.66 
2.98 
2.35 
2.93 
3.22 
2.50 
2.37 
2.37 
3.75 
2.86 
3.13 
2.76 
3.61 
2.92 
3.17 
3.15 
3.14 
2.62 
2.71 
3.14 
3.18 
2.60 
3.91 


17.60 


273... 


350 


17.46 


274 


351. . . 


14. ?0 


275. 


352 


17.31 


276 


353 


16.06 


277 


354 


18. 25 


278 


355 


17.11 


279. 


356 


17. f-0 


280... . 


357 


16.28 


281 


358. 


20.14 


282. 


359 


16.44 


283 


360 


17.82 


284. 


361. . 


438 

439 


15. 20 


285 


362 


16.99 


286 


363 


440. 


13. 44 


287 


364 


441 


16.72 


288 


365 


442. 


17.98 


289. 


366. 


443 


14 30 


290 


367 


444 


13.56 


291. 


368 


445 


13 51 


292 


i 369. . 


446 


21. 37 


293. 


370 


447 

448 

449 


16 33 


294 


371 


16.67 


295 


372 


15 76 


296 


373 


450 

451 

452 

453 


20.62 


297 


'374.. 


16 68 


298 


i 375 


18.07 


299 


1 376. 


17 96 


300 


j 377 


454 

455 


17.92 


301 


378 


14 95 


302 


379 


456 

457 

45'^ 

459 


15. 47 


303 

304 

305 


380 

381 

382 


17.92 
18.20 
14 84 


306. 


383 


460... 

461 


22 29 


307 


384 

385 




308 


462 


2.39 


is. 64 



27889— Xo. 78—05- 



82 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

Table 18. — Variations in content of proteids — Continued. 





Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 

N.x 5,7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N.x 5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N.>: 5.7). 


463 


2.49 
1.98 
3. 32 
2.98 
2.89 
2.95 
2.74 
2.80 
2.24 
2.49 
2.76 
2.80 
2.95 
2.52 
2.95 
3.15 
2.27 
2.72 
3.04 
3.15 
2.60 
3.45 
2.59 
2.68 
3.01 
2.41 
3.45 
2.46 
2.87 
2.06 
3.18 
2.45 
2.36 
2. .52 
2.84 
2.82 
2.97 
.3.06 
2.64 
2.72 
2.31 
3.06 
2.71 
2.49 
3.13 
2.89 
3.20 
2.93 
3.61 
2.71 
2.86 
2.41 
2.27 
3.28 
2.36 
3.64 
2.81 
2.54 
2.68 
3.12 
2.99 
1.93 
2.51 
1.71 
3.15 
2.35 
2.88 
2.64 
2.97 
2.75 
3.22 
2.95 
3. 03 
2.57 
2.88 
2.64 
3.76 


14. 24 
11.29 
18.97 
17.01 
16.48 
16.82 
15.62 
15.97 
12.79 
14.22 
15.78 
15.97 
16.83 
14.39 
16.85 
18.00 
12.96 
15.53 
17. .38 
17.97 
14.86 
19.71 
14.81 
15.31 
17.18 
13.77 
19.70 
14.02 
16.40 
11.78 
18.16 
13. 97 
13.45 
14.38 
16.21 
16.08 
16.95 
17.48 
15.09 
15.56 
13. 19 
17.48 
15.46 
14.24 
17.85 
16.51 
18.29 
16.71 
20.59 
15.45 
16. 33 
13.79 
12.98 
18.75 
13. 49 
20. 75 
16. 03 
14.48 
15.28 
17.79 
17.05 
11.04 
14.35 

9.79 
17.99 
13. 42 
16.44 
15.06 
16.94 

15. 73 
18.37 

16. 82 
17.29 
14.66 
16.47 
1.5.09 
21.46 


540 


3.17 
3.09 
3.33 
3.50 
1.29 
2.10 
2.54 
2.73 
3.01 
2.50 
2.84 
2.99 
2.30 
3.21 
2.91 
3.16 
3.02 
3.30 
3.25 
2.94 
3.32 
3.00 
1.12 
2.36 
3.83 


18.12 
17.66 
19.01 
19.96 ' 
7.37 
11.98 1 

14. 49 i 

15. 59 
17.21 
14.30 
16.20 
17.08 
13.11 
18.35 
16.59 
18.06 
17.26 
18.86 
18.58 
16.78 
18.93 
17. 13 

6.40 
13.49 
21.84 1 


617. 


3.12 
2.67 
3.59 
2.68 
2.24 
3.19 
3.52 
2.67 
2.68 
2.69 
2.88 
3.68 
3.47 
2.48 
3.39 
3.22 
1.64 
2.10 
3.42 
3.08 
2.77 
3.54 
3.15 
2.82 
3. .37 
2.57 
3.35 
3.41 
2.44 
3.77 
2.82 
2.53 
2.56 
2.59 


17.83 


464 


541 


618 


15.27 


465 


542 


619 


20.49 


466 


543 


620 


15.30 


467 


544 


621 


12.79 


468 


545 


622. ... 


18.23 


469 


546 


623 


20.09 


470 


547 


624 


15.27 


471 


548 


625 


15.30 


472 . 


549 


626 


15.38 


473 


550 


627 


16.44 


474 


551 


628 


21.01 


475 


552 


629 


19.82 


476 


553 


630 


14.16 


477 


554 


631 


19.35 


478 


555 


632 


18.41 


479 


556 


633 


9.38 


480 


557 


634 


11.99 


481 


558 


635 


19.52 


482. 


559 


6.36 


17.61 


483 


560 


637 


15.79 


484 


561 


638 


29.21 


485 


562 


639 


18.00 


486 


563 


640 


16.10 


487 


564 


641 


19.26 


488 


565 


642 


14.68 


489 


566 


3.49 
3.08 
2.17 
3.03 
3.20 
2. .52 
3.12 
2.52 
3.25 
3.17 
2.52 
3.09 
2.73 
3. 35 


19.49 
17.57 
12.39 
17.29 
18.27 
14.37 
17.82 
14.41 
18.53 
18.10 
14.40 
17.61 
15.60 
19.10 


643 


19.14 


490 


567 


644 


19.47 


491 


568 


645 


13. 91 


492 


569 


646 


21.54 


493 


570 


647 


16.08 


494 


571 


648 


14.47 


495 


572 


649 


14.63 


496 .. . 


573 


650.- 

651 


14.82 


497 


574 




498 


575. 


652 

653 

654 


2, 83 
2.50 
2.59 
3,21 
2,56 
2.55 


16.19 


499 


576 


14.31 


500 


577 


14.81 


501 


578 


655 


18.30 


502 


579 

580 


656 


14.61 


503 


657 


14. 57 


504 


581 

582 

583 


3.79 
2.59 
3.13 
3.49 
3.05 
3.27 
2.56 
2.83 
2.84 
2.86 
3.06 
3.20 
2.88 
3. 32 
3.18 
3.09 
3.32 
2.34 
3.12 
2.97 
2.08 
3.64 
2.56 
2.53 
2.56 
3. 13 
3.01 
3.05 
2.75 
3.51 
3.00 
3.26 
3.84 
2.77 
2.72 
3.72 


21. ei 

14.77 
17.86 

19. 91 
17.40 
18.65 
14.60 
16.17 
16,20 
16. 31 
17.44 
18.29 
16.47 
18.93 
18.17 
17.66 
18.93 
13.39 
17.81 
16.97 
11.91 
20.77 
14.62 
14.45 
14.60 
17.85 
17.20 
17.41 
15.72 
20.05 
17.15 
18.62 

21. 92 
15.79 
15.52 
21.22 


658 




505 


659 


2.92 
3.26 
2.55 
2.50 
2,82 
2,80 
3. ,33 
2.35 
2.31 
2.50 
4.36 
6.33 
2.32 
4.82 
3.39 
3.24 
3.41 
3.11 
2.51 
3.09 
2.48 
2.30 
3.36 
2.49 
2.70 
3.59 
4.04 
2.79 
2.83 
2.65 
2.68 
3.38 
3.04 
2.81 
2.35 


16.70 


.506 


660 


18.60 


507 


584 


661 


14.56 


508 


585 


662 


14.26 


509 


586 


663 


16.11 


510 


587 


664 


15.98 


511 


588 


665 


19.01 


512 


589. 


666 


13. 40 


513 


590 

591 


667 


13.20 


514 


668 

669 

670 


14.30 


515 


592 


24.86 


516 


593. 


36.12 


517 


594 


671 

672 

673 

674 

675 

676 

677 


13.23 


518. 


595 


28.15 


519 


596 


19. 35 


520 


.597 


18.48 


521 


598 

! 599 


19.44 


522 


17.73 


523 


1 600 


14. .36 


524 


601 

602 


: 678 

679 

680 

681 

682 

683 

684 

685 


17.65 


525. 


14.17 


526 


603 


13. 13 


527 


604 


19.17 


528 


': 605 


14.20 


529 


606 


1.5. 41 


530 


607 


20.51 


531 


608 


23.06 


532 . 


609 


686 


15.90 


533 


610 


687 

688 


16.13 


534. 


611 


15.12 


535 


612 


689 

690 

601 

692 

693 


15. 28 


536. 


613 


19.26 


537... 


614 


17.33 


538 


615 


16.04 


539 


616 


13.76 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



83 



Table^IS. — Variations in content of proteids — Continued. 





Percentage of— 


Record 
1 number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
numoer. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 

N. X5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material . 


Proteids 
(proteid 

N. x5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 

N. x5.7). 


094 


2.15 
2.92 


12.29 
16.69 


7."0 

I 731 

1 732 


2.09 
3.18 
2.41 
2.06 
2.76 
2.09 
2.29 
1.61 
2.01 
2.85 
1.87 
1.75 
.3.57 
2.63 
1.97 
2.98 
1.77 
2.79 
1.83 
2.29 
2.22 
3.48 
3.48 
1.33 
3.55 
2.43 
2. .30 
2.14 
1.67 
2.14 
3.72 
2.47 
2.93 
2.02 
2.18 
2.20 


11.92 
18.18 
13.78 
11.77 
15. 73 
11.96 
13. 09 

9.20 
11.44 
16.26 
10.71 

9.99 
20. 36 
15.02 
11.23 
16.99 
10.10 
15. 95 
10.44 
13.06 
12.66 
19.85 
19.87 

7. 53 
20.29 
13. 90 
13. 15 
12.24 

9.54 
12.25 
21.21 
14.12 
16.72 
11. 56 
12.47 
12.57 


766 


2.87 
2.22 
2.45 
2.37 
1.37 
1.62 
2.00 
1.73 
2.32 
1.88 
2.28 
2.80 
1.98 
2.35 
2.85 
2.79 
2.64 
2.81 
1.92 
2.25 
3.29 
2.95 
2.13 
2.20 
2.86 
3.02 
2.16 
2.32 
2.82 
2.48 
2.45 
2.20 
2.95 
2.18 
2. 02 


16 41 


()95 


767. 


12 69 


006 


768 

769 . . 


13 98 


097 


2.11 
3.03 
2.64 
4.10 
2.51 
2.27 
2.33 
2.43 
2.48 
1.87 
3.07 
2. 12 
L87 
2.10 
2.08 
2.61 
2.20 
2.16 
3.23 
2.77 
2.38 
3.14 
2.16 
1.80 
2.14 
2.16 
2.18 
2.04 
2.32 
2.19 
1.79 
2.49 
2.92 


12.07 

17.29 

15. 09 

23. 42 

14.33 

12.96 

13. 34 

13.94 

14.18 

10.69 

17.52 

12.09 

10.67 

12.00 

11.87 

14.88 

12.58 

12.32 

18.44 

15.81 

13. 61 

17.91 

12. 35 1 

10. 29 ■ 

12. 22 ; 

12. 36 1 

12. 43 
11.67 

13. 26 
12. 52 
10.23 
14.22 
16. 46 


733 

734 


13 51 


09,-i 


770 

771 


7 86 


699 . 


7.35 

' 7.36 

7.37 


9 27 


700 

701 


772 

77.3 


11.42 
9 87 


702 

703 


738 

739 


774 

775 

776 


13.26 
10 76 


704 

705. 


740 

741 

742 

743 

744 

745 

746 

747 

748 

749 

750 

751 

752 

753 

754 

7.55 


13. 03 
16 02 


706 


778 

779 

780 

781. . . 


11 33 


707 

708 

709 


13. 40 
16.29 
15.94 


710 


782 


15.09 


711 


783 


16 02 


712 


784 


10.96 


713 


785.. .. 


12 88 


714 


786 


18.75 


715 


787. 


16 82 


716 


788 


12. 17 


717 


789. 


12 57 


718 


790... . 


16. 32 


719 


791 

792. 


17 2'' 


720 


756 


12. 36 


721 


757 

7.58 


793 


13 24 


722 


794 

795 

796 

797 

798 


16 11 


723 


759 

760 

761 

762 

763 

764 

765 


14. 15 


724 

725 


14.00 

r' 56 


726. 


16 !^2 


797 


799 


12 48 


72': 

729 


800 


11.57 









It will be noticed that there is a veiy large range of variation in 
the proteid nitrogen content of these wheats, running from 1.12 to 
4.95 per cent. By referring to Table 8, it will be seen that an equally 
large variation occurred between the plants when the whole plant 
was sampled. In the 351 analyses the nitrogen ranges from 1.20 to 
5. 85 per cent. This is due in the main to the ability of the plant 
to gather nitrogen from the soil. In no one of the experiments to 
ascertain the effect of nitrogenous manures on the composition of 
wheat has there been an increase of more than a few tenths of 1 per 
cent, even when the nitrogenous fertilizer was added to an exhausted 
soil. It is, therefore, not likely that such large variation in nitrogen 
content could be due to irregularities in the supply of soil nitrogen. 
If this ability of the plant to store up a large amount of nitrogen in 
the kernel is hereditary, as results given later indicate, there is ample 
opportunity to develop by selection a strain of wheat of high nitrogen 
content. 



8-4 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

A BASIS FOR SELECTION TO INCREASE THE QUANTITY OF 
PROTEIDS IN THE ENDOSPERM OF THE KERNEL. 

White bread Hour, which constitutes the iiiajor portion of the 
wheat flour consumed in this country, is derived entirely from the 
endosperm of the wheat kerneL The portions of the kernel not 
entering into the flour are the germ and the seed coat, attached to 
each of which discarded constituents are portions of the endosperm. 
The lai'ger part of the aleurone la3^er either adheres to the hull and 
constitutes the "bran ' of commerce, or appears in the product 
known as "shorts," and sometimes in low-grade flour. 

As it is the flour in which it is desired to increase the nitrogen, 
and as the flour consists entirely of the endosperm, it becomes desir- 
able to have some way to determine the nitrogen content of the 
endosperm alone and to select for reproduction plants possessing a 
large amount of nitrogen in this portion of the kernel. 

It is a question how this can best be done. A determination of 
gluten by the ordinary method of washing, to carry off the starch 
and fiber while the gluten is being worked in the hand, is not well 
adapted for use with the small quantities of wheat obtainable from 
a single plant. This also has the disadvantage that it gives no 
indication as to the quality of the gluten. 

Determinations of gliadin and glutenin promise to be of some help 
in aft"ording a basis for selection from individual plants. It has 
been shown b}^ Osborne and Voorhees " that the gluten of wheat is 
composed of gliadin and glutenin. It does not necessarily follow, 
however, that the sum of these two substances is a measure of the 
gluten content of the sample analyzed. Osborne and Campbell'^ 
have stated that the embryo of the wheat kernel does not contain 
either gliadin or glutenin. This being the case, the sum of the 
gliadin and glutenin would represent these proteids in the endosperm, 
with, perhaps, a small amount in the hull. 

A recent investigation by Nasmith '' leads him to conclude that 
gliadin exists in ail portions of the endosperm, including the aleu- 
rone layer, but that glutenin is contained onl}^ in the starch-bearing 
portion of the endosperm. A determination of glutenin ma}^, there- 
fore, give an indication of the gluten content of the wheat. 

Table 19 shows the percentage of proteid nitrogen, the sum of 
the gliadin and glutenin nitrogen, the amounts in grams of proteid 
and of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen in the average kernel, and the 
grams of proteid and of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen in all of the 
kernels on each plant. The plants are grouped into those having 

«Amencan Cheni. Jour., 1893, pp. 392-471. 

'^ Connecticut Experiment Station Report, 1899, p. 305. 

'Trans. Cauad. Inst., 7 (1S03), Univ. Toronto Studies, Physiol. Ser. (1903), No. 4. 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN ENDOSPERM, 



85 



from 1 to 2 per cent proteid nitrogen, those having 2 to 2.5 per cent 
proteid nitrogen, etc. Table 20 gives the averages for each of the 
groups in Table 10. 

Table 19. — Relation ofgUadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid nitrogen. 
1 TO 2 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



Record number. 


Percentage 
of— 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 




Weight (in grams) of— 


Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen. 


Glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 


Ker- 
nels. 


Gliadin- 
Proteid plus- 
Average j nitro- ghitenin 
kernel, gen in , nitro- 
kemels. gen in 
' kernels. 
t 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
average 
kernel. 


55307 

80305 


1.89 
1.81 
1.98 


1.56 342 
1.77 729 


5. 6864 

15. 7835 


0.01663 j 0.10747 0.08871 
.02165 .28569 .27937 


0.0003142 
. 0003919 
. 0004170 


0.0002594 
. 0003832 
. 0004128 


81705 


1.96 465 1 9.7922 .02106 1 .19388 .19193 


Average . . 


1.89 


1.76 512 ; 10.4207 .01978 1 .19568 .18667 


.0003744 


. 0003518 



2 TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



21212 

27205 


2.16 
2.41 
2.36 
2.12 
2.35 
2. .39 
2.11 
2.38 
2.02 
2.48 
2.42 
2.30 
2.42 
2. .34 
2.21 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
2. .30 
2.34 
2.41 


0.19 
1.70 
1.46 
1.65 
2.12 
1.92 
1.84 
1.80 
1..50 
1.97 
1.96 
1.66 
1.95 
1.83 
2.05 
1.68 
1.81 
1.95 
2.05 
.64 
1.64 


84 
891 
777 
539 
318 
.301 
1,031 
608 
314 
167 
562 
.302 
509 
462 
380 
544 
373 
583 
464 
786 
287 


1. 7216 
16. 4061 
19. 1854 
12. 0399 
6. 1026 
7. 0,596 
21.5399 
11.66.55 
6. 4302 
2. 5160 
12. 2210 
9. 2120 
9. 3093 
10.9073 
12. 0728 
9.8298 
7.0051 
11.7066 
9. 6451 
18.3614 
7.3993 


0. 02049 
. 01841 
. 02469 
.02183 
.01919 
. 02345 
.02089 
.01919 
. 02048 
.01507 
.02175 
. 03050 
. 01829 
.02361 
.03177 
.01807 
.01878 
. 0200S 
.02079 
. 02336 
.02578 


0.03718 
.39539 
. 45276 
. 24942 
. 14341 
. 16872 
. 45435 
.27765 
. 12989 
.06240 
. 29575 
.21187 
.22529 
. 25522 
. 26680 
. 23690 
. 15971 
. 24468 
.22184 
. 42965 
. 17833 


0.00327 
.27890 
. 28010 
. 19S66 
. 12643 
. 13554 
.39635 
. 20997 
. 09645 
. 04957 
. 23953 
. 15292 
. 18153 
. 19960 
. 24750 
. 16514 
. 12680 
. 22828 
. 19772 
.11750 
. 12135 


0. 0004427 
. 0004437 
. 000.5827 
. 0004627 
.0004510 
. 0005605 
. 0004407 
.0004,567 
. 0004137 
.000,3736 
. 0005262 
. 0007016 
.0004426 
. 0005524 
. 0007021 
. 0004355 
. 0004282 
. 0004197 
. 0004781 
. 0005466 
. 0006213 


0.0000389 
. 0003130 
. 0003605 
. 0003602 
. 0004163 
. 0004502 
. 0003844 
. 0003454 
. 0003072 
. 0002969 
. 0004263 
. 0005063 
. tKX)3566 
. 0004321 
. 0006513 
. 0003036 
.0003399 
. 0003916 
. 0004262 
.0001495 
. 0004228 


27206 

27.505 

33107 


33605 

39205 


48106 


48409 


55309 

55908 

55909 

56206 


56207 


57508 

6.5306 


6.5307 


6.5.308 

74606 

81707 

81708 


Average.. 


2. .30 


1.68 


489.6 


10. 5874 


.02173 


. 24272 


. 17872 


. 0004991 


. 0003652 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



20706 


2.78 
2.77 
2.83 


2.05 
1.85 
2.00 


163 
444 

867 


3. 3138 
9. 9070 
17.1115 


0. 02033 
. 02282 
. 01974 


0. 09212 
. 27443 
. 4S42S 


0. 06793 

. 18328 
. 34222 


0. 0005652 
. 0006181 
. 0005,586 


0. 0004168 
. 0004222 
. 0003948 


20707 


20710 


21207 


2.96 


.17 


118 


2. 3066 


. 01955 


. 06804 


.00392 


. 0005766 


.13000332 


21305 


2.67 
2.90 


•1.97 
.97 


313 
226 


6. 2514 
4. 1516 


. 02004 
.018.37 


. 16691 
.12039 


. 12315 
.04027 


. 0005353 
. 0005327 


. 0003948 
.0001782 


21306 


21805 


2.69 


.23 


1,232 


20. 9290 


.016:» 


. 56299 


. 04704 


. 0004569 


.0000391 


21807 


2.73 


2.11 


377 


9. 4172 


. 02498 


. 25709 


. 19870 


. 0006664 


. 0005271 


21808 


2. ,57 


1.96 


1, 1,56 


19. 7446 


.01708 


.50744 


. 38700 


. 0004389 


. 0003348 


21809 


2.73 
2.64 


2.18 
2.18 


418 
791 


8. 0214 
14.3111 


.01919 
.01809 


.21898 
.37781 


. 17487 
.31198 


. 0005238 
. 0004777 


. 0004183 
. 0003944 


21905 


22205 


2.81 


1.97 


283 


2. 6965 


. 00953 


.07577 


.05312 


. 0002677 


. 0001.S77 


22207 


2.77 


1.82 


169 


3. 2787 


. 01940 


.09082 


.05967 


. 0005374 


.0003531 


26905 


2.76 
2.71 


2.09 

1.82 


,326 

228 


6.4102 
4. 2376 


. 01966 
. 01859 


. 17692 
.11484 


. 13398 
.07712 


. 0005427 
. 0005037 


.0004109 
. 0003383 


26906 


26908 


2.96 


2.16 


192 


3.9797 


.02073 


. 11780 


.08,596 


.00061.35 


. 0004478 


26909 


2.80 


1.88 


180 


2. 9999 


.01667 


. 08400 


. 05640 


. 0004667 


. 0003134 


27005 


2.63 


1.90 


866 


16. 4120 


.01895 


. 43164 


.31182 


. 0004984 


. 0003600 


27207 


2.92 


1.95 


166 


3. 3266 


.02004 


.09712 


.06487 


. 000,5850 


. 0003908 


27305 


2.58 
2,53 


1.73 

.82 


267 
167 


5. 5666 
3.0850 


. 02085 

.01847 


. 14362 
. 07805 


. 09630 
. 02,530 


. 0005379 
. 0004674 


. 0003607 
.0001515 


27,307 


27506 


2.70 


1.98 


444 


10. 0005 


. 02252 


.27003 


. 19800 


. 0006082 


. 0004459 


27508 


2.64 


2 .32 


251 


5. 5^24 


.02287 


.14608 


. 12835 


. 0006037 


. 0005306 


27509 


2.90 


1.09 


243 


5.3615 


.02206 


.15549 


.05844 


. 0006399 


. 0002405 



86 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 19. — Relation of gliadin-plu.s-glutenin nitrogen to proteid nitrogen — Continued. 
2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Record number. 


Percentage 
of— 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 




\\ 


eight (in 


grams) of— 




Pro- 


Glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 

1.55 
3.50 
2.29 
1.26 






Proteid 


Gliadin- 
plus- 


1 
Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 

3.0007.309 
.0005644 
.000.5SN1 
. 0005:327 


GUadin- 
plus-ghi- 




teid 


Ker- 


Average 


nitro- 


glutenin 


tenin ni- 




nitro- 
gen. 


nels. 


kernel. 


gen HI 
kernels. 


nitro- 
gen in 


trogen in 
average 






87' 
1.32 
309 
461 








kernels. 


kernel. 

0. 0003894 
. 0006787 
. 0004550 
.(1(102485 


28805 


2.91 
2.91 
2.96 
2.64 


2. 1851 
2. 5601 
6. 1394 
8.0905 


0. 02512 
.01939 
.01987 
.01972 


0.06359 
. 07450 
. 18173 
. 23998 


0.03.387 
.03960 
. 14060 
. 10194 ^ 


33105 


37305 


.37705 


37707 


2.93 


2.10 


193 


3. 3004 


.01710 


. 09670 


. 06931 


.000.501(1 


.(1(103,591 


38005 


2.84 
2.63 


1.23 
1.39 


139 
401 


2. 51.34 
8. 4605 


. 01808 
. 02110 


. 07138 
.22251 


. 03091 
. 11760 


.000.5i:'.:i 
■.00O5."iHi 


.(10(12224 
. (1(1(129,33 


38606 


3860S 


2.82 


1.73 


158 


3. 0228 


.01913 


. 0S522 


.05229 ) 


.00()."i;!il 


.(l(l(r3.309 


.38609 


2.74 


1.34 


293 


6. 7665 


.02309 


. 18540 


.09067 


. 000r,47.-, 


.(l(l();094 


39405 


2.88 


1.44 


447 


9. 3541 


.02093 


. 21399 


.13470 


.000(1(1-'. 


.(lil((i014 


39506 


2.93 


2.06 


67 


1.9218 


.02869 


.05631 


.03959 


.000S-i(l4 


.(1(10.5910 


40505 


2.82 


2 19 


170 


4. 1.546 


. 02444 


.11716 


.09099 


.0006892 , 


. 0005352 


43405 


2.92 


1.18 


124 


2. 8000 


. 02258 


. 08176 


.03304 , 


.0006594 ' 


. 0002664 


44505 


2.94 


.70 


340 


5.9990 


.01764 


. 17637 


. 04199 


.0005187 


. 0001235 


44606 


2.90 


1.29 


124 


2. 5235 


. 02035 


. 07318 


. 03255 


. 0005902 


. 0002625 


46107 


2.54 


2.08 


478 


8.3935 


.017.56 


.21319 


. 17458 


. 0004460 


. 0003652 


48305 


2.87 


1.77 


473 


12. 0278 


. 02543 


. 34524 


. 21289 


. 0007299 


. 0004501 


48806 


2.70 


.75 


547 


9.8346 


.01798 


. 26553 


. 07376 


. 0004877 


. aw 1348 


.5.5008 


2.60 


1.58 


944 


17. 4226 


.01846 


. 45299 


. 27528 


. 0004799 


. 0002917 


,5.5206 


2.56 


1.87 


578 


U. 3592 


. 01965 


.29079 


.21241 


.000,5031 


. 0«)3675 


.55308 


2.54 


.65 


397 


9. 5078 


. 02.395 


.24150 


. 06180 


. 0006225 


. 0001557 


.5.5.506 


2.80 


2.20 


866 


17. 8506 


. 02062 


.43995 


. 39272 


. 000.5773 


. 0004536 


55.507 


2.63 


2.07 


504 


9. 8228 


. 01949 


. 25834 


. 20333 


.0005126 


. 0004034 


55605 


2.64 


1.96 


500 


10. 9180 


.02184 


. 28823 


.21400 


. 000o7tl.-. 


.(1(1(14281 


55606 


2.58 


1.49 


593 


11. 0930 


.02205 


. 28580 


. 16529 


.000.5(1', 1(1 


.(1(1(12609 


55905 


2.67 


1.75 


\331 
M99 


5. 7948 


.01751 


. 15470 


. 10141 


.0004(174 


.(1(10 3064 


55906 


2.81 


1.47 


7.9968 


.01603 


. 22471 


.11755 


. 0004503 


. 0002356 


55907 


2.59 


1.61 


749 


19. 3966 


. 02590 


. 50238 


. 31229 


.0006:07 


.0004170 


56105 


2.73 

2.57 


2.12 
2.09 


336 
644 


5. 7431 
12.0161 


.01709 
. 01866 


. 15679 
. 30881 


.12175 

. 25174 


.0004667 
. 0004795 


. 000,3622 
. 0003900 


56106 


56107 


2.96 
2.51 
2.61 
2.59 
2.65 
2.75 
2.62 
2.61 
2.80 
2.85 


2.23 
1.85 
1.95 
2.21 
2.09 
2.13 
1.86 
1.64 
2. .34 
1.55 


872 
333 
563 
950 
88 
1.35 
762 
596 
ISO 


14. 45.56 
6. 5232 
13. 5720 
15. 80S6 
1.5364 
2. 4923 
14.9992 
12. 2004 
2. 7616 
6. 9861 


. 01658 
. 019,59 
.02,3,56 
. 01664 
.01746 
. 01846 
. 01968 
. 02047 
.01534 
. 01946 


. 42790 
. 16373 
..34616 
. 40945 
.04164 
. 06854 
. .39297 
.31842 
. 07733 
. 19905 


. 32236 
. 12068 
. 26465 
. 34937 
.03211 
. 05309 
. 27898 
.20008 
. 06462 
. 10828 


. 0004907 
.0004917 
.0006149 
.0004310 
. 0004731 
. 0005077 
.0005157 
. 0005343 
.0004296 
. 0005545 


. 0003697 
.0003624 
. 0004.594 
. 0003677 
. 0003649 
. 0003932 
. 0003660 
. 0003557 
. 0003590 
. 0003016 


56205 


56208 


56209 


57007 . . 


57406 


.57407 


57408 


57506 


57507 


.57805 


2.87 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
2.94 
2.71 


2.68 
2.11 
2.20 
2.18 
2.65 
2.03 


270 
1,153 
165 
370 
146 
722 


4. S988 
23. 1471 
3. .3006 
7. 6690 
2. 8.^27 
15. 3928 


.01814 
. 01999 
. 02001 
. 02073 
. 01940 
.021S2 


. 14060 
' . 63422 

. 0920S 

.02017 
: . 0S328 

.41715 


. 13126 
. 48839 
. 07261 
. 16714 
. 07507 
. 31248 


. 0005207 
. 0005464 
. 0005581 
. 0005451 
. 0005704 
. 0005778 


. 0004861 
. 0004218 
. 0004402 
. 0004519 
. 0005141 
. 0004328 


58805 


63106 


66005 


81505 


81706 


Average . . 


2.74 


1.79 


419.3 


8. 2271 


.01991 


. 22222 


. 14658 


. 0005468 


. 0003557 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



20709.. 
20805.. 
21205.. 
21208. . 
21307.. 
21006.. 
21907.. 
22206.. 
22208.. 
22210.. 
22211.. 
26808. . 
28206.. 
28806.. 
33305.. 
33607.. 
48306.. 
48506. . 



3.05 


2.31 


258 


5. 3229 


3.32 


2.26 


697 


14. 6942 


3.16 


.22 


123 


2. 3642 


3.24 


2.15 


287 


5. 1594 


3.04 


.46 


143 


2. 5691 


3.18 


2.10 


408 


10. 4800 


3.35 


2.15 


158 


2.9248 


3.22 


2.11 


146 


2.5712 


3.18 


2.14 


118 


1.9090 


3.17 


1.55 


233 


6.0173 


1 3.17 


1.69 


561 


11.5675 


1 3.09 


2.28 


222 


3.8811 


3.07 


2.42 


219 


4.3698 


1 3.02 


1.86 


685 


14. 46,30 


3.41 


2.41 


150 


3. 1346 


3.22 


2.45 


1.36 


2.8903 


3.29 


2.13 


157 


2. 6571 


3.20 


2.17 


556 


9. 4585 



0.02063 
.02157 
.01922 
. 01798 
.01796 
. 02563 
. 01851 
.01720 
.01619 
. 02019 
. 02002 
.0r48 
. 01996 
.02111 

. 02o:io 

.02125 
.01602 
.01701 



0. 16235 


0. 12296 


. 48784 


. .33208 


. 07471 


.00520 


. 16712 


. 11093 


. 07810 


.01182 


. .33402 


.22008 


. 03798 


.06288 


. 08086 


.05425 1 


. 06071 


'.04084 1 


. 19075 


. 09327 


. ,36671 


. 19548 


.11992 


. 08849 


.13415 


. 10575 


. 43679 


. 26901 


. 10689 


.07.5.54 


. 09307 


.07081 


. 08742 


. 05660 


. 30267 


. 20525 



0. 0006292 
. 0006999 
. 0006074 
. 0005824 
. 000,5461 
. 0008168 
. 0(X)6201 
. 0005538 
. 0005144 
.0006401 
. 0006537 
. 0005402 
. 0006126 
. 0006376 
. 0007126 
. (X)06S43 
. 0005568 
. 0005444 



0. 0004766 
. 0004875 
. 0000423 
. 0003866 
. 0000826 
. 0005382 
. 0003980 
. 0003629 
. 0003465 
. 0003129 
. 0003485 
. 0003985 
. 0004830 
. 0003926 
. 0005037 
. 0005206 
. 0003604 
. 0003691 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN ENDOSPERM. 



87 



Table 19. — Relation of (jliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid nitro(/en — Continued. 
3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Record number. 


Percentage 
of— 




Weight (in grams) of— 


Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen. 


Glia- 
din- 
plua- 
gln- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 


Ker- 
nels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Proteid 
nitro- 
gen in 

kernels. 


Gliadin- 

plus- 
glutenin 
nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
average 
kernel. 


i 48705 


.3.13 
.3.00 
3.05 
3.16 
3.11 
3.18 
3.09 
3.01 


1.56 
.71 
1.99 
1.75 
1.96 
2.92 
2.49 
2.47 


264 
379 
393 
451 
216 
221 
307 
235' 


4. 3615 
6. 1983 
7. 9684 
7. 18.52 
3. 7407 
2. 4731 
4. 2207 
2. 5436 


0. 01652 
.01635 
. 02028 
. 01593 
. 01732 
.01118 
. 01375 
. 01082 


0. 13652 
. 18596 
. 24303 
. 22705 
. 11636 
. 07859 
. 13042 
. 07656 


0.06S04 
.04401 

. 15857 
. 12574 
. 07XV2 


0.0005171 
. 0004906 
. 0006185 
. 000.5034 
. 0005386 
ii(i(i;."v';fi 


0. 0002577 
.0001161 
. 0004036 
. 0002788 
. 0003395 
. 000.3264 
. 0003424 
. 0002673 


48706 

55005 


55006 

5.5508 

57905 


58207 


. III,"! Ill . IIOIIJ248 
.06280 1 .00032.58 


5S705 


Average . . 


3.16 


1.95 


299.5 


5. .5S17 


.01817 


. 17602 


. 10889 


.0005741 


. 0003516 



3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17.506 


3.52 
3.81 
3.75 
3.82 
3.92 
3.61 
3.63 
3.58 
3.66 
3.54 


2.23 
1,54 
2.16 
1.88 
1.35 
1.77 
2.73 
1.36 
1.76 
1.38 


93 
103 
567 
173 
144 
563 

94 
235 
1.37 
366 


2. 2881 
1. 4864 

11.9114 
3. 5574 
2. 0390 

12. 1088 
1.8494 
3. 234J 
1.9154 
6.0090 


0. 02460 
. 01443 
. 02101 
. 02056 
.01416 
.02252 
. 01967 
.01376 
. 01398 
.01642 


0. 0S044 
. 05663 
. 44666 
. 13589 
. 07993 
. 43713 
. 06713 
.11575 
. 07010 
.21272 


0. 05102 
.03315 
. 25728 
. 06688 
. 02753 
. 21432 
. 05049 
. 04398 
.03371 
. 08292 


0. 0008660 
. 0005498 
. 0007877 
. 0007855 
.0005551 
. 0007764 
.0007142 
. 0004927 
.0005117 
. 0005'<12 


0. 0005486 
. 0003218 
. 0004538 
. 0003955 
.0001912 
. (X)03986 
. 0005370 
.0001871 
. 0002460 
.0002266 


18905 

21S11 


2190S 


26107 

38,505 

42205 


4.5005 


48.505 

66006 


Average . . 


3.68 


1.82 


247. 5 


4. 6399 


.01811 


. 17024 


. 08613 


. 0006620 


.0003506 

t 



4 TO 4,5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



21,S12 

21813 


4.26 
4.04 
4.43 
4.33 
4.21 
4.45 


2.02 
2.14 
1.98 
2.44 
2.21 
2.03 


983 
216 
525 
207 
118 
447 


14.81.37 
4.0258 

12. 1819 
4. 1281 
2. 1571 
5.4411 


0.01507 
.01877 
.02317 
. 01994 
. 01828 
.01217 


0.63107 
. 16377 
. 53889 
. 17875 
. 09082 
. 24213 


0. 29934 
. 08615 
. 29846 
. 10073 
. 04767 
.11046 


0. 0006420 
.0007582 
. 0010265 
. 0008635 
. 0007696 
. 0005417 


0. 0003044 
.0004017 
. 0005677 
. 0004865 
.0004040 
. 0002471 


21909 


34405 


55007 

76206 

Average . . 


4.29 


2.14 


416 


7. 1230 


.01790 


. 30757 


. 1.5714 


. 0007669 


. 0004019 



MORE THAN 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



21206 


5.23 
5.03 
4.69 
4.87 
5.82 
5.59 
4.93 


0.22 
1.34 
3.07 
2.25 
1.94 
2.51 
4.06 


149 
237 
194 
249 
110 
188 
347 


2. 8564 
3. 9143 
3. 6302 
3. 2964 
2. 4420 
3. 4442 
6.0091 


0.01917 
. 01577 
. 01871 
.01324 
. 02220 
.01832 
.01732 


0. 149.39 
. 19689 
. 17026 
. 16053 
. 14213 
. 19253 
. 29625 


0. 00628 
. 05245 
. 11145 
. 08168 
. 04738 
. 08645 
. 24397 


0. 0010026 
. 0007934 
. 0008776 
. 0006447 
.0012921 
. 0010241 
. 0008539 


0. 0000422 
.0002113 
.000.5744 
. 0002979 
. 0004307 
. 0004598 
. 0007032 


21210 

40205 

48406 

69,805 


72607 


92.306 

Average . . 


5.16 


2.198 


210.6 


3. 6561 


. 01782 


. 18685 


. 08995 


. 0009269 


. 0003885 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 20. — Suminaryof analyses, showing relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid 

nitrogen. 





Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Percentage 
of— 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 


Weight (in grams) of— 


Range of per- 
centage of 
proteid nitro- 
gen. 


Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen. 


GUa- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 


Kernels. 


Proteid 
Average nitrogen 
kernel. ! in ker- 
nels. 


GUadin- p.„tpiH 

nitrogen ^^„\gg 
kernels, ^ ^^'^^'^l- 


GUadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
average 
kernel. 


1 to2 . 


3 
21 
70 
26 
10 
6 
7 


1.89 
2.30 
2.74 
3.16 
3.68 
4.29 
5.16 


1.76 
1.68 
1.73 
1.95 
1.82 
2.22 
2.20 


512.0 
489.6 
419.3 
299.5 
247.5 
416.0 
210.6 


10.4207 
10. 5874 
8. 2271 
5.5817 
4. 6399 
7. 1230 
3. 6561 


0.01978 0.19568 
.02173 .24272 
.01991 [ .22222 
.01817 .17602 
.01811 .17024 
.01790 .307,57 
.01782 .18685 


0.18667 0.0003744 


0.000.3518 


2 to 2.5 


.17872 1 .0004991 : .00036.52 


2 5 to 3 


.13948 .0005468 1 .0003442 


3to3.5 


.10889 .0005741 ! .000.3516 


3 5 to 4 . . . 


.08613 .0006620 , .(XI03.506 


4to4.5 


.15714 .0007669 .0004019 


4.5 and over.. .. 


. 08995 . 0009269 


.0003886 



The figures in Table 20 show that while gliadin-phis-glutenin nitro- 
gen increases with proteid nitrogen it does not do so in the same ratio, 
the increase in proteid nitrogen being due in large measure to an 
increase in other proteids. 

The same anah^ses are tabulated in Table 21 according to the 
increase in gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen, and the averages for each 
group are stated in Table 22. In the latter table the increase in 
proteid nitrogen does not keep pace with the increase in gliadin-plus- 
glutenin nitrogen, there being 1.74 per cent other proteid nitrogen in 
the first group and 1.25 per cent in the last. 

It thus becomes evident that a determination of proteid nitrogen in 
the kernel is not an accurate guide to the content of gliadin plus 
glutenin, and that a direct determination of these substances is 
necessary. 

It is, furthermore, apparent that a determination of gliadin-plus- 
glutenin nitrogen will permit of the selection of kernels having a 
large percentage of these substances. 

Table 21. — Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1 TO 1.5 PER CENT. 





Percentage of — 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 


Weight (in grams) of— 


Record num- 
ber. 


GUadin- 
plus- 
glute- 
nin ni- 
trogen. 


Proteid 
nitro- 
gen. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


GHadin 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 

kernels. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


GUadin- 
plus-glute- 
nin nitro- 
gen in aver- 
age kernel. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


21210 

26107 

27201 

27509 


1.34 
1.35 
1.46 
1.09 
1.26 
1.23 
1.39 
1.34 
1.44 
1.18 
1.29 
1.36 
1.49 
1.47 
1.38 


5.03 
3.92 
2.36 
2.90 
2.64 
2.84 
2.63 
2.74 
2.88 
2.92 
2.90 
3.58 
2.58 
2.81 
3.54 


237 
144 
777 
243 
461 
139 
401 
293 
447 
124 
124 
235 
505 
499 
366 


3.9143 
2.0390 

19. 1854 
5.3615 
8.0905 
2.5134 
8.4605 
6.7665 
9.3.541 
2.8000 
2.5235 
3. 2340 

11.0930 
7.9968 
6.0090 


0.01575 
.01416 
.02469 
.02206 
.01972 
.01808 
.02110 
.02309 
.02093 
.02258 
.02035 
.01376 
.02205 
.01603 
.01642 


0.05245 
.027.53 
. 28010 
.05844 
. 10194 
.03091 
.11760 
.09067 
. 13470 
.03304 
.03255 
.04398 
. 16529 
.11755 
. 08292 


0.19689 
.07993 
.45276 
. 15549 
.23998 
.07138 
.22251 
. 18540 
.21399 
.08176 
.07318 
.11575 
. 28580 
.22471 
. 21272 


0.0002113 
.0001912 
.0003605 
. 0002405 
.0002485 
.0002224 
.0002933 
.0003094 
.0003014 
.0002664 
.0002625 
.0001871 
.0002609 
.0002356 
.0002266 


0.0007934 
.0005551 
.0005827 
. 0006399 


37705 


. 00053''7 


38005 


.0005135 


38606 


. 0005549 


38609 


. 00(t('479 


39405 


.0001027 


4340b 


. 00011.594 


44606 


. 0005902 


45005 


. 0004927 


55606 


. 0005690 


55906 


. 0004.503 


66006 


.0005812 


Average . . . 


1.34 


3.08 


333 


6.6228 


.01939 


.09198 


. 18748 


.0002545 


.0005843 



SELECTION TO INCKEASE PROTEIDS IN ENDOSPERM. 



89 



Table 21. — Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.5 TO 2 PER CENT. 





Percentage of— 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 




Weight (in 


grams) of 


- 




Record num- 
ber. 


Gliadin- 
plus- 
glute- 
nin ni- 
trogen. 


Proteid 
nitro- 
gen. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 


Proteid ' 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Gliadin- 
plus-glute- 
nin nitro- 
gen in aver- 
age kernel. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


18905 


1.54 
1.85 
1.97 
1.96 
1.88 
1.98 
1.97 
1.82 
1.55 
1.69 
1.82 
1.88 
1.90 
1.70 
1.95 
1.73 
1.65 
1.98 
1..55 
1.86 
1.92 
1.77 
1.73 
1.84 
1.80 
1.77 
1..50 
1.76 
1.56 
1.99 
1.75 
1.58 
1.87 
1.97 
1..56 
1.96 
1.96 
1.75 
1.61 
1.96 
1.66 
1.8.5 
1.95 
1.83 
1.95 
1.86 
1.64 
1.55 
1.68 
1.81 
1.95 
1.94 
1.76 
1.96 
1.64 


3.81 
2.77 
2.67 
2.57 
3.82 
4.43 
2.81 
2.77 
3.17 
3.17 
2.71 
2.80 
2.63 
2.41 
2.92 
2.58 
2.12 
2.70 
2.91 
3.02 
2.39 
3.61 
2.82 
2.11 
2.38 
2.87 
2.02 
3.66 
3.13 
3.05 
3.16 
2.60 
2.57 
2.48 
1.89 
3.11 
2.64 
2.67 
2.59 
2.42 
2.30 
2.51 
2.42 
2.34 
2.61 
2.62 
2.61 
2.85 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
5.82 
1.81 
1.98 
2.41 


103 

444 
312 

1,156 
173 
525 
283 
169 
298 
561 
228 
180 
866 
891 
166 
267 
539 
444 
87 
685 
301 
563 
158 

1,031 
608 
473 
314 
137 
264 
393 
451 
944 
578 
167 
342 
216 
500 
331 
749 
562 
302 
333 
509 
462 
563 
762 
596 
359 
544 
373 
583 
110 
729 
465 
287 


1.4864 

9.9070 

6. 2514 

19. 7446 

3. 5574 

12. 1819 

2. 6965 

3.2787 

6.0173 

11.5675 

4.2376 

2.9999 

16.4120 

16. 4061 

3. 3266 

5.5666 

12. 0399 

10.0005 

2.1851 

14. 4630 

7. 0596 

12. 1088 

3.0228 

21.5399 

11.6655 

12.0278 

6. 4302 

1.9154 

4. 3615 

7.9884 

7. 1852 

17.4226 

11.3592 

2.5160 

5. 6864 

3.7407 

10.9180 

5. 7948 

19.3966 

12.2210 

9. 2120 

6.5232 

9.3093 

10.9073 

13.5720 

14.9992 

12.2004 

6.9861 

9.8298 

7.0051 

11.7066 

2.4420 

15. 7835 

9.7922 

7.3993 


0.01443 
.02282 
.02004 
.01708 
.02056 
. 02317 
.00953 
.01940 
.02019 
.02062 
.01859 
.01667 
.01895 
.01841 
.02004 
.02085 
.02183 
.02252 
.02572 
.02111 
.02345 
.022.52 
.01913 
. 02089 
.01919 
.02.543 
.02048 
.01398 
.01652 
.02028 
.01593 
.01846 
.01965 
.01507 
.01663 
.01732 
.02184 
.01751 
.02590 
. 02175 
.03050 
.01959 
.01829 
.03361 
.02356 
.01968 
.02047 
.01946 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.02220 
.02165 
.02106 
. 02578 


0.03315 
. 18328 
. 12315 
.38700 
.06688 
.29846 
.05312 
.05967 
.09327 
.19548 
.07712 
.05640 
.31182 
.27890 
.06487 
.09630 
. 19866 
.19800 
.03887 
. 26901 
. 13554 
.21432 
.05229 
.39635 
.20997 
. 21289 
.09645 
.03371 
.06804 
. 15857 
. 12574 
.27528 
.21241 
.04957 
.08871 
.07332 
.21400 
.10141 
.31229 
.23953 
. 15292 
. 12068 
. 18153 
. 19960 
.26465 
.27898 
.20008 
. 10828 
. 16514 
. 12680 
.22828 
.04738 
. 27937 
. 19193 
. 12135 


0.05663 
. 27443 
. 16691 
.50744 
. 13589 
.53889 
. 07577 
.09082 
. 19075 
.36671 
. 11484 
.08400 
.43164 
.39.539 
.09712 
. 14362 
.24942 
.27003 
.06359 
. 43679 
. 16872 
.43713 
.08522 
.45435 
.27765 
.34,524 
. 12989 
.07010 
. 13652 
.24303 
. 22705 
.45299 
.29079 
.06240 
. 10747 
.11636 
.28823 
. 15470 
. 50238 
.29575 
.21187 
. 16373 
.22529 
.25522 
.34616 
.39297 
.31842 
. 19905 
.23690 
. 15971 
.24468 
. 14213 
.28569 
. 19388 
. 17833 


0.0003218 
.0004222 
. 0(X)394S 
.0003348 
. 0003955 
. 0005677 
.0001877 
.0003,531 
.0003129 
.0003485 
.0003383 
.0003134 
.0003600 
.0003130 
. 0003908 
.0003607 
.0003602 
.00044.59 
. 0003894 
.0003926 
.0001502 
.0003986 
.0003309 
.0003844 
.0003454 
.0004501 
.0003072 
.0002460 
.0002577 
.0004036 
.0002788 
.0002917 
. 0003675 
. 00029H9 
. 0002.599 
. 0003305 
. 00042S1 
. 0003064 
.0004170 
. 0004263 
.000,50i;3 
.0003(;24 
. 0003566 
.0004321 
.0004.594 
.0003660 
.0003357 
.0003016 
.0003036 
.0003399 
.0003916 
. 0004307 
.0003832 
.0004128 
.0004228 


0.0005498 


20707 


. 0006181 


21305 


.000.5350 


21808 


. 0004389 


21908 


. 0007855 


21909 

22205 

22207 

22210 


.0010265 
. 0002677 
. 000.5376 
.0006401 


22211 


. 0006537 


26906 


.0005037 


26909 

27005 


.0004667 
.0004984 


27205 


.0004437 


27207 


. 0005850 


27305 

27505 


.0005379 
.0004627 


27506 


.0006082 


28805 


. 0007309 


28806 


.0006376 


33605 . . 


.0005605 


38505 

38608 


.0007764 
.0005394 


39205 . . 


. 0004407 


48106 


.0004567 


48305 


. 0007299 


48409 

4S505 


.0004137 
.0005117 


48705 


.0005171 


55005 


.0006185 


55006 


.0005034 


55008 

55206 


.0004799 
.0005031 


55305 

55307 


.0003736 
.0003142 


55508 


. 0005386 


55605 . 


. 0005765 


55905 


. 0004674 


55907 


. 000ii707 


55908 


. 0005262 


55909 


.0007016 


56205 


.0004917 


56206 


.0004426 


56207 


.0005524 


56208. 


. 0006149 


57407 


.0005157 


57408 


. 000.5343 




. 0005545 


65306 


.0004355 


65307 


. 0004282 


65308 


.0004197 


69805 


. 0002921 


80305 


.0003919 


81705 


.0004170 


81708. . 


. 0006213 






Average . . . 


1.80 


2.76 


442.5 


9.0243 


.02016 


. 16392 


.23801 


.0003653 


. 0005538 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2 TO 2 5 PER CENT. 



17506 
20706 
20709 
20710 
20805 
21208 
21807 
21809 
21811 
2IS12 
21813 
21905 



9 9:i 


3.52 


93 


2.05 


2.78 


163 


2.31 


3.05 


258 


2.00 


2.83 


867 


2.26 


3. .32 


697 


2.15 


3.24 


287 


2.11 


2.73 


377 


2.18 


2.73 


418 


2.16 


3.75 


567 


2.02 


4.26 


983 


2.14 


4.04 


216 


2.18 


2.64 


791 



2. 2881 
3. 31.38 
5. 3229 
17.1115 
14.6942 
5. 1594 
9. 4172 
8. 0214 
11.9114 
14.8139 
4. 0258 
14.3111 



0. 02430 
. 02033 
. 02063 
. 01974 
. 021.57 
.01798 
. 02498 
.01919 
.02101 
. 01507 
. 01877 
.01809 



0.05102 
. 06793 
.12296 
. 34222 
. 33208 
. 11093 
. 19870 
. 17487 
. 25728 
. 29934 
.08615 
.31198 



0. 0<'044 
. 09212 
. 16235 
. 48428 
. 48784 
. 16712 
. 25709 
. 21898 
. 44666 
. 63107 
. 16377 
. 37781 



0. 0005486 
. 0004168 
.0004766 
. 0003948 
. 0004875 
. 00038f,6 
.0005271 
. 0004183 
. 0004538 
. 000.3044 
.0004017 
. 0003944 



0. 00086P0 
. 0005652 
. 00062f 2 
. 00055^6 
.0006999 
. 0005S24 
. 0006664 
. 0005238 
. 0007877 
. 0006420 
. 0007582 
. 0004777 



90 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 21. — Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2 TO 2.5 PER CENT— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 



2190fi. 
21907. 
22206. 
22208. 
26808. 
26905. 
2690S. 
27508. 
28206. 
33107. 
33305. 
.33607. 
34405. 
37305. 
.37707. 
39506. 
40505. 
46107. 
4S306. 
4S406. 
48506. 
.55007. 
.5.5.506. 
5.5507. 
.56105. 
56106. 
.56107. 
.56209. 
57007. 
57406. 
57506. 
5750S. 
58207. 
58705. 
58805. 
63106. 
66005. 
74606. 
76206. 
81706. 



Percentage of- 



Gliadin-; 
plus- (Proteid 
glute- I nitre 

nin ni- gen. 

trogen. 



Average . 



3.18 
3.35 
3.22 
3.10 
3.09 
2.76 
2.96 
2.64 
3.07 
2.35 
3.41 
3.22 
4.33 
2.96 
2.93 
2.93 
■1 82 
2.54 
3.29 
4.87 
3.20 
4.21 
2.80 
2.63 
2.73 
2.57 
2.96 
2.59 
2.65 
2.75 
2.80 
2.21 
3.09 
3.01 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
2.30 
4.45 
2.71 



Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 



408 
158 
146 
118 
222 
326 
192 
251 
219 
318 
150 
136 
207 
309 
193 
67 
170 
478 
157 
249 
556 
118 
866 
504 
336 
644 
872 
950 
168 
135 
180 
380 
307 
235 
1,158 
165 
370 
464 
447 
722 



Weight (in grams) of — 



Kernels. 



10. 4800 
2. 9248 
2. 5712 
1.9090 
3.8811 
6. 4102 
3. 9797 
5. 5324 
4. 3698 
6. 1026 
3. 1346 
2. 8902 
4. 1281 
6. 1394 

3. .3004 
1.9218 
4.1546 

8. 3935 
2. 6.571 
3. 2964 

9. 4585 
2. 1571 

17. 8506 
9. 8228 
5. 7431 
12.0161 
14. 4556 
15. 8086 

1. 5364 

2. 4923 

2. 7616 
12. 0728 

4. 2207 
2. 5436 

23. 1471 

3. .3006 
7. 6690 
9. 6451 
5.4411 

15.3928 



Gliadin- 
\vera2e Pl"?-g'u- 
kernd tenm ni- 
'^*^'"^'- trogen in 

kernels. 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 



0. 02563 
.01851 
.01720 
.01619 
. 01748 
.01966 
. 02073 
. 02287 
. 01996 
.01919 
. 02090 
.02125 
. 01994 
. 01987 
.01710 
. 02869 
02444 
. 01756 
.01692 
. 01.324 
.01701 
. 01828 
. 02062 
. 01949 
.01709 
. 01866 
. 01658 
. 01664 
.01746 
. 01846 
.01534 
. 03177 
. 01375 
. 010S2 
. 01999 
.02001 
. 02073 
. 02079 
.01217 
. 02132 



0. 22008 
. 06288 
. 05425 
.04084 



. 13398 
. 08596 
. 12835 
. 10575 
. 12643 
. 07554 
. 07081 
. 10073 
. 14060 
. 06931 
. 03959 
. 09099 
. 1745S 
.05660 
.08168 
. 20525 
. 04767 
. .39272 
.20333 
. 03503 
. 05'68 
. 10553 
. 34937 
.03211 
. 05309 
. 06462 
. 24750 
. 10510 
. 06283 
. 48839 
.07261 
.16714 
. 19772 
.11046 
. 31248 



0. .33403 
. 09798 
. 08086 
. 06071 
. 11992 
. 17692 
.11780 
. 14608 
. 13415 
. r4341 
. 10689 
. 09307 
. 17875 
. 18173 
. 09670 
. 0.5631 
.11716 
.21319 
. 08742 
.16053 
. 30267 
. 09082 
. 49995 
. 25834 
. 15679 
. 30881 
. 42792 
. 40945 
.04164 
. 06854 
. 07733 
. 26680 
. 13042 
. 07656 
. 63422 
. 09208 
.20170 
. 22184 
. 24213 
. 41715 



Gliadin- 
plus-glute- 
nin nitro- 
gen in aver- 
age kernel. 

0. 0005382 
! . 00039SO 
. 0003629 
. 000i4i;5 
. 0003985 
.0004109 
. 0004478 
. 0005306 
. 0004830 
.0004163 
. 0005037 
. 0005206 
. 0004865 
. 0004550 
. 0003591 
. 0005910 
. 0005352 
. 0003652 
. 000^604 
. 0002979 
. 0003691 
. 0004040 
. 0004536 
. 0004034 
.0001042 
.0000896 
.0001210 
. 0003677 
. 0003649 
. 0003932 
. 0003590 
. 0006513 
. 0003424 
. 0002673 
. 0004218 
. 0004402 
. 0004519 
. 0004202 
. 0002471 
. 0004328 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 



0.0008168 
.0006201 
. 0(X)5538 
.0(K15144 
. 0005402 
. 0(105427 
. 0006135 
. 0006037 
.0006126 
. 0004510 
.0007126 
. 0006843 
. 0008635 
. 0005881 
. 0005010 
. 0008404 
. 0006892 
. 0004460 
. 0005568 
. 0006447 
. 0005444 
. 0007696 
. 0(H)5773 
. 0005126 
. 0004667 
. 0004795 
. 0004907 
. 0004310 
. 0004731 
. 0005077 
. 000*296 
. 0007021 
. 0(X)4248 
. 0003258 
. 0005464 
. 0005581 
. 0005451 
. 0004781 
. 0005417 
. 0005778 



7.2520 j .01935 



. 14641 



. 21535 



. 0004003 . 0005872 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2.5 TO 3 PER CENT. 



42205 

57805 

57905 

72607 

81505 


2.73 
2.68 
2.92 
2.51 
2.65 


3.63 
2.87 
3.18 
5.59 
2.94 


94 
270 
221 
188 
146 


1. 8494 
4. 8988 
2. 4731 
3.4442 1 
2.8327 : 


0. 01967 
.01814 
.01118 
. 018.-2 
. 01940 


0. 050049 
.13126 
. 07221 
. 03645 
. 7.507 


0. 06713 
.14060 
. 07859 
. 19253 
. 08328 


0. 000.5370 
. 0004861 
. 000'264 
.000^598 
.0005141 


0. 0007142 
. 0005207 
. 000-'556 
.0010241 
. 0005704 


Average . . . 


2.698 


3.64 


183.8 


3.0696 


.01734 


. 08310 


. 11243 


. 0004647 


.0006.370 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 3 PER CENT AND OVER. 



40205 

92"06 


3.07 
4.06 


4.69 
4.93 


194 
347 


3.6302 
6.0091 ' 


0.01871 
.01732 


0.11145 
. 24397 


0. 17026 
.29625 


0. 0005744 
. 0007032 


0. 0008776 
. 0008539 






Average . . . 


3.56 


4.81 


270.5 


4.8196 


. 01801 


. 17771 


.23325 

1 


. 0006388 


.0008657 



IMPROVEMENT IN QUALITY OV GLUTEN. 



91 



Table 22. — Summary of analyses, showing relation vf proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus- 
* glutenin nitrogen. 



] Percentage ' Number 

I of— j- nf— 

Range of 
percentage o 

trlinHin-nliiR. 



Range of ! p,. 
percentage of ^J' 
gliadin-plus- 7^- 
gluteninni- P^','Jf. 



liadin-plus- 7f- I Pro- 
Cluteninni- P'^f" ' ■■ 



luus- . ■, i An- 

g'".- nitro-'^ly- 

luitro- ^™- 
I gen- 



Ker- 
nels. 



Weight (in grams) of— 



Kernels. 



Gliadin- 
l)lus-glu- 
Average , tenin ni- 
kemel 1 trogen 
in ker- 
nels. 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 



Gliadin- 
plus-glute- 
nin nitro- 
gen in 
average 
kernel. 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 



1 to l.o ' 1.34 

1.5 to 2 i 1.80 

2 to 2.5 2.18 

2.5 to3 [ 2.70 

■3 and over 3.56 



3.08 
2.76 
3.08 
3.64 
4.81 



333 
442.5 
380. 1 
183.8 
270.5 



6. 6228 
9. 0243 
7. 2520 
3. 0696 
4. 8196 



0. 019.39 
.02016 
. 01935 
. 01734 
. 018Q1 



0. 09198 
. 16392 
. 14641 
. 08310 
. 17771 



0. 18748 
. 23801 
.21535 
.11243 
. 23325 



0. 0002545 
. 0003653 
. 0004063 
. 0004647 
. 0006388 



0. 0005843 
. 00055.'^8 
.000.5872 
. 0006370 
. 0008657 



IMPROVEMENT IN THE QUALITY OF THE GLUTEN. 

It is well known that large differences exist in the bread-nif^ing 
values of different varieties of wheats even when they have approxi- 
mately the same gluten content and are raised in the same locality. 
This fact is generally attributed to differences in the quality of the 
gluten. 

W. Farrar" points out the dift'erence in the bread-making qualities 
of two wheats due to the quality of the gluten. He compares Saxon 
Fife wheat, which had a gluten content of 9.92 per cent, and which 
produced 309 pounds of bread from 200 pounds of flour, with Purple 
Straw Tuscan wheat, which had a gluten content of 9.94 per cent, and 
which produced only 278 pounds of bread from the same quantity of 
flour. 

In this case it w^as not the amount but the quality of the gluten that 
determined the greater excellence of the Saxon Fife wdieat. 

It has further been stated b}^ Girard/' Snyder,' and Guthrie'' that 
the ratio in which gliadin and glutenin exist in the gluten determines 
its value for bread making. 

It was considered desirable to ascertain whether the proportions 
of these two constituents remain about the same in wheats of high 
and of low content. If the quality of the gluten remains constant as 
the quantity increases, the value of the wheat for bread making will 
improve in about the same ratio. If, on the other hand, there is a 
tendency for the quality to deteriorate as the quantity increases, 
there would be greater difficulty in eft'ecting improvement. 

In Table 23, analyses of the crop of 1903 are arranged in groups 
according to their content of gliadin plus glutenin. The first group 
comprises all plants having less than 1 per cent, and each succeeding 
group increases by 0.25 per cent. It is followed by Table 24, which 
is a summary of Table 23. 

« Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 9 (1898), pp. 241-250. 

&Compt. Rend., 1897, p. 876. 

'■;^^innesota Experiment Station Bulletins 54 and 63. 

c? Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 9 (1898), pp. 363-374. 



92 



IMPKOVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 23. — Ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of their sum increases. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, BELOW 1 PER CENT. 



Percentage of— 


Proportion of — 


Percentage of— 


Record number. ; ^{^f^^in- 

1 glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin 
nitrogen. 


Glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin. 


Glutenin. 


Slfn'P^'e^ 
nitrogen.^ nitrogen. 


21205 0.216 

21206 218 

21207 .170 

21212 .192 

21306 1 .975 

21307 j .461 

21805 1 .230 

27307 821 

48806 748 

55308 655 

81707 .636 


0.114 
.142 
.099 
.109 
.505 
.255 
.126 
.806 
.018 
.629 
.237 


0.102 
.076 
.071 
.083 
.470 
.206 
.104 
.015 
.730 
.026 
..399 


0.528 
.651 
.582 
.567 
.518 
.447 
.548 
.982 
.024 
.960 
.372 


0.472 
.349 
.418 
.433 
.482 
.5.53 
.452 
.018 
.976 
.040 
.628 


3.16 
5.23 
2.96 
2.16 
2.90 
3.04 
2.69 
2..'-)3 
2.70 
2.54 
• 2.34 


2.944 
5.012 
2.790 
1.968 
1.925 
2.579 
2.460 
1.709 
1.952 
1.885 
1.704 


Average .. .484 


.276 


.208 


.562 


.438 


2.93 


2.448 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1 TO 1.25 PER CENT. 



27509 


1.087 
1.227 
1.184 


1.072 

.593 

1.078 


0.015 
.634 
.106 


0.986 
.483 
.910 


0.014 
.517 
.090 


2.90 
2.84 
2.92 


1.813 
1.613 
1.736 


38005 


43405 


Average . . 


1.166 


.914 


.2.52 


.793 


.207 


2.89 


1.721 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.25 TO 1.50 PER CENT. 



26107 . 


1.352 
1.465 
1.265 


0.108 
.815 
.715 


1.244 
.650 
.550 


0.080 
.5.56 
.565 


0.920 
.444 
.435 


3.92 
2.36 

2.64 


2.568 

.895 

1.375 


27206 


37705 


38606 


1.387 


.725 


.662 


..522 


.478 


2.63 


1.243 


38609 


1.336 


..586 


.7.50 


.439 


.561 


2.74 


1.404 


39405 


1.439 


.818 


.621 


.568 


.432 


2.88 


1.441 


44606 


1.287 


1.0.57 


.230 


.821 


.179 


2.90 


1.613 


45005 


1.361 


1.240 


.121 


.911 


.089 


3.58 


2.219 


55606 


1.493 


.899 


..594 


.602 


.398 


2.58 


1.087 


55906 

Average . . 


1.470 


.443 


1.027 


.301 


.699 


2.81 


1.340 


1.385 


.741 


.645 


..536 


.463 


2.90 


1.518 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.50 TO 1.75 PER CENT. 



18905 


1.537 
1.555 
1.692 
1.700 
1.735 
1.651 
1.555 
1.731 
1.504 
1.563 
1..581 
1.561 
1.608 
1.658 
1.639 
1.546 
1.683 
1.641 


0.143 

.801 

1.002 

1.073 

1.075 

1.032 

.9.58 

.962 

.690 

.057 

.687 

.908 

.632 

.810 

1.177 

1.141 

.965 

1.221 


1.394 
.7.54 
.690 
.627 
.660 
.619 
.597 
.769 
.814 

1.506 
.894 
.6.53 
.976 
.848 
.462 
.405 
.718 
.420 


0.093 
.515 
.592 
.631 
.619 
.625 
.616 
.556 
.459 
.036 
.435 
.582 
.393 
.488 
.717 
.738 
.573 
.744 


0.907 
.485 
.408 
.369 
.381 
.375 
.384 
.444 
.541 
.964 
.565 
.418 
.607 
.512 
.283 
.262 
.427 
.256 


3.81 
3.17 
3.17 
2.41 
2. .58 
2.12 
2.91 
2.82 
2.02 
3.13 
2.60 
1.89 
2.59 
2.30 
2.61 
2.85 
2.41 
2.41 


2.273 

1.615 

1.478 

.710 

.845 

.469 

1.355 

1.089 

.516 

1..567 

1.019 

.329 

.982 

.642 

.971 

1.304 

.727 

.769 


22210 

22211 

27205 

27305 


27505 

28805 

38608 

48409 


48705.. 


.55008 

55307 


55907. 


.55909 ... 


57408 

57507 


65306 . 


81708 


Average . . 


1.619 


.852 


.767 


..523 


.477 


2. 65 


1.037 



IMPROVEMENT IN QUALITY OF GLUTEN. 



93 



Table 23. — Ratio of gliadin to glidenin as the content of their sum increases — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.75 TO 2 PER CENT. 



Record number. 


Percentage of— 


Proportion of— 


Percentage of— 


Gliadin- 

plus- 
glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin Glutenin 
nitrogen.! nitrogen. 


Gliadin. 


Glutenin. 


Proteid 
nitrogen. 


Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


20707 


1.855 


1.046 


0.809 


0.564 


0.436 


2.77 


0.915 


20710 


1.996 


1.125 


.871 


.564 


.436 


2.83 


.834 


21305 


1.969 
1.9f!3 


1.049 
1.046 


.920 
.917 


.533 
.533 


.467 
.467 


2.67 
2.57 


.701 
.607 


21808 


21908 


1.876 


1.015 


.861 


.541 


.459 


3.82 


1.944 


21909 


1.976 
1.969 


1.367 
1.185 


.609 

.784 


.697 
.602 


.303 
.398 


4.43 
2.81 


2.4.54 
.841 


22205 


26906 


1.819 


.988 


.831 


.543 


.457 


2.71 


.891 


26909 


1.879 


.996 


.883 


..531 


.469 


2.80 


.921 


27005 


1.904 
1.946 


1.066 
1.278 


.838 
.668 


.559 
.652 


.441 
.348 


2.63 
2.92 


.726 
.974 


27207 


27506 


1.977 


1.147 


.830 


.580 


.420 


2.70 


.723 


28806 


1.864 


.902 


.962 


.484 


.516 


3.02 


1.156 


33605 


1.919 


1.124 


.795 


.585 


.415 


2.39 


.471 


38505 


1.766 
1. 845 
1.805 
1.766 


.862 
1.117 
1.035 

.996 


.904 

.728 
.770 
.770 


.488 
.605 
.573 
.564 


.512 
.395 
.427 
.436 


3.61 
2.11 

2.38 
2.87 


1.844 
.265 
..575 

1.104 


39205 


48106 


48305 


48505 


1.757 


.965 


.792 


.549 


.451 


3.66 


1.903 


5.5005 


1.987 
1.7.54 


1.102 
1.099 


.885 
.655 


.555 
.626 


.445 
.374 


3.05 
3.16 


1.063 
1.406 


55006 


55206 


1.866 


.840 


1.026 


.4.50 


.550 


2.56 


.694 


55305 


1.974 


1.042 


.932 


.528 


• .472 


2.48 


. .506 


55508 


1.959 


1.037 


.922 


.529 


.471 


3.11 


1.151 


55605 


1.959 


1.044 


.915 


.533 


.467 


2.64 


.681 


55905 


1.7.50 
1.957 


.575 
1.075 


1.175 
.882 


.328 
.549 


.672 
.451 


2.67 
2.42 


.920 
.463 


55908 


56205 


1.850 


.883 


.967 


.477 


.523 


2.51 


.660 


56206 


1.949 


1.089 


.860 


.559 


.441 


2.42 


.471 


56207 


1.827 


.987 


.840 


.540 


.460 


2.34 


.513 


56208 


1.946 


1.127 


.819 


.579 


.421 


2.61 


.664 


57407 


1.858 


.935 


.923 


.503 


.497 


2.62 


.762 


65307 


1.815 


1.052 


.763 


.579 


.421 


2.28 


.465 


65308 


1.946 


1.090 


.8.56 


.560 


.440 


2.09 


.144 


69805 


1-.937 


1.142 


.795 


.589 


.411 


5.82 


3.883 


80305 


1.770 


1.1.59 


.611 


.661 


.339 


1.81 


.040 


81705 

Average . . 


1.956 


1.048 


.908 


.535 


.465 


1.98 


.024 


1.889 


1.044 .845 


.552 


.448 


2.82 


.929 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTEXIX NITROGEN. 2 TO 2.25 PER CENT. 



17506 


2.226 


1.468 


0.768 


0.655 


0.345 


3.52 


1.294 


20706 


2.053 


1.089 


.964 


.530 


.470 


2.78 


.727 


21208 . . . 


2.146 
2.110 


1.154 
1.174 


.992 
.936 


.537 
..5.56 


.463 
.444 


3.24 
2.73 


1.094 
.620 


21807 


21809 


2.178 


1.183 


.995 


.543 


.457 


2.73 


.5,52 


21811 


2. 1.56 


1.144 


1.012 


.531 


.469 


3.75 


1..594 


21812 


2.023 


1.139 


.884 


.563 


.437 


4.26 


2.237 


21813 


2.141 


1.045 


1.096 


.488 


.512 


4.04 


1.899 


21905 


2.181 
2.096 


1.344 

1.208 


.837 

.888 


.616 
.576 


.384 
,.424 


2.64 
3.18 


.459 
1.084 


21906 


21907 


2.146 


1.187 


.9.59 


.553 


.447 


3.35 


1.204 


22206 


2.113 


1.271 


.842 


.601 


.399 


3.22 


1.107 


22208 


2.142 


1.309 


.833 


.611 


.389 


3.18 


1.038 


26905 


2.087 


1.197 


.890 


.573 


.427 


2.76 


.673 


26908 


2. 1.58 


1.2.50 


.908 


.579 


.421 


2.96 


.802 


33107 


2.123 


1.283 


.840 


.604 


.396 


2.35 


.227 


37707 


2.097 
2.065 


1.044 
1.281 


1.053 

.784 


.498 
.620 


.502 
.380 


2.93 
2.93 


.833 
.865 


39506 


40505 


2.189 


1.143 


1.046 


..522 


.478 


2.82 


.631 


46107 


2.076 


1.164 


.912 


..561 


.439 


2.54 


.464 


48306 


2.135 


1.130 


1.005 


.529 


.471 


3.29 


1.155 


48406 


2.249 


1.290 


.9.59 


.574 


.426 


4.87 


2.621 


48506 


2.171 


1.104 


1.067 


.508 


.492 


3.20 


1.029 


55007 


2.211 


1.248 


.963 


.564 


.436 


4.21 


1.999 


55506 


2.197 


1.136 


1.061 


.517 


.483 


2.80 


.603 


55507 


2.070 


1.079 


.991 


.521 


.479 


2.63 


.560 


56105 


2.118 


1.277 


.841 


.603 


.397 


2.73 


.612 


56106. 


2.091 


1.091 


1.000 


.522 


.478 


2.57 


.479 


56107 


2.234 


1.033 


1.201 


.462 


.538 


2.96 


.72e 


56209 


2.208 


1.161 


1.047 


.526 


.474 


2. .59 


.382 



94 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OP WHEAT. 



Table 23. — Ratio of (jltadin to glxtenin ns the content of their sum increases — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2 TO 2.25 PER CENT— Continued. 



Record number. 


Percentage of— Proportion of— 


Percentage of— 


Gliadin- 

plus- 
glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin 
nitrogen. 


Glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin. 


Glutenin. 


Proteid 
nitrogen. 


Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


57007. 


2.093 
2.134 
2.053 
2.112 
2.199 
2.181 
2.046 
2.029 
2.034 


1.159 
1.080 
1.124 
1.060 
1.186 
1.142 
1.016 
1.223 
1.701 


0.934 

1.054 

.929 

1.0.52 

1.013 

1.039 

1.030 

.806 

.333 


0.553 
.506 
.547 
.501 
.539 
.528 
.496 
.602 
.816 


0.447 
.494 
.453 
.499 
.461 
.472 
..504 
.398 
.184. 


2.65 
2.75 
2.21 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
2.30 
4.45 
2.71 


0.557 
.616 
.157 
.628 
..591 
.449 
.254 

2.421 
.676 


57406 

57508 

58805 

63106 

66005 

74606 

76206 

81706 

Average . . 


2.130 


1.187 


.943 


..557 


.443 


3.05 


.921 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2.25 TO 2.50 PER CENT. 



Ill 


2.313 
2.259 
2.281 
2.324 
2.424 
2.407 
2.446 
2.443 
2.293 
2.344 
2.492 
2.467 


1.307 
1.215 
1.377 
1.247 
1.366 
1.182 
1.391 


1.006 
1.044 
.904 
1.077 
1.058 
1.225 
1 . 055 


0.565 
.538 
.604 
.537 
.563 
.491 
.569 
.503 
..527 

■ .511 
..526 
.484 


0.435 
.462 
.396 
.463 
.437 
.509 
.431 
.497 
.473 
.489 
.474 
.516 


3.05 
3.32 
3.09 
2.64 
3.07 
3.41 
3.22 
4.33 
2.96 
2.80 
3.09 
3.01 


0.737 

1.061 
.809 
.316 
.646 

1.003 
.774 

1.887 
.667 
.456 
..598 
.543 


27.508 ... 


28206 


33305 . 


33607 


34405 


1.230 1.213 


37305 


1.208 
1.203 
1.313 
1.195 


1.085 
1.141 
1.179 
1.272 


57506 


58207 . . 


58705 

Average . . 


2.374 


1.268 


1.105 


.535 


.465 i 3.16 j .791 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2.50 PER CENT AND OVER. 



40205 


3.089 

2.728 
2.684 
2.918 
2.515 
2.652 
4.063 


1.850 
1.480 
1.303 
1..573 
1.459 
1.066 
2.388 


1.219 
1.248 
1.381 
1.345 
1.056 
1.586 
1.675 


0.603 
.542 
.485 
.539 
.,579 
.401 
.587 


0.397 
.458 
.516 
.461 
.421 
.599 
.413 


4.69 
3.63 
2.87 
3.18 
5.59 
2.94 
4.93 


1.621 
.902 
.186 
.282 

3.075 
.288 
.867 


42205 

57805 

57905 

72607 


81.505 


92306 

Average . . 


2.947 


1..588 


1.358 


..534 


.466 


3.98 


1.029 



Table 24. 



-Summary of analyses, showing the ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of 
their sum increases. 





Percent- 
age of 

gliadin- 
plus- 

ghitenin 

nitrogen. 


1 Percentage of— 


Proportion of— 


Percentage of— 


Range of percentage 

of gliadin-plus- 
gliitenin nitrogen. 


Number i 

anah'se-! G^adin ■ Glutenin 
aiidi>be>. iiitrogeji nitrogen. 

! 


Gliadin. 


Glutenin. 


Proteid 
nitrogen. 


Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Below 1 


0.484 
1.166 
1..385 
1.619 
1.889 
2. 130 
2.374 
2.947 


11 1 0.276 
3 .914 

10 . 741 
IS [ .852 
37 1 1.044 
.39 i 1.187 

12 1 1.268 
7 1.588 


0.208 
.252 
.645 
.767 
.845 
.043 
1.105 
1.358 


0.562 
.793 
.536 
.523 
..552 
. 557 
.535 
.534 


0. 4.38 
.207 
.463 
.477 
.448 
.443 
.465 
.466 


2.93 
2.89 
2.90 
2.65 
2.82 
3.05 
3.16 
3.98 


2.448 


1 to 1.25... 


1.721 


1 25 to 1.50 


1.518 


l.,50to 1.75 

1.75 to 2 

2 to 2.25 


1.0'*7 
.920 
.921 


2.25 to 2.50 


.791 


2.50 and over 


1.029 



It will be seen from Table 24 that the ratio of gliadin to glutenin 

remains practically the same as the percentage of their sum increases. 

It would therefore be safe to assume that an ii. crease in the gluten 



BREEDING TO INCREASE PROTEID NITROGEN. 95 

content of a given variety of wheat raised in the same region would 
carry with it a corresponding improvement in its vahie for bread 
making, although there might be fluctuations from year to year in 
quality of gluten, as there is in the quantity. 

If the quality of gluten is determined by the ratio of gliadin and 
glutenin of which it is composed, it is likely that there is some certain 
proportion that is most desirable. Unfortunately, the investigators 
who have taken up this subject do not by any means agree upon the 
proper ratio. Should this be ascertained there would be ample oppor- 
tunit}^ for the selection of individual plants in which the proportion 
of gliadin and glutenin would approximate the ideal. There would 
thus be possible a much more rapid improvement in the quality of 
wheat than can be accomplished by confining selection to an increase 
in the gluten. 

An obstacle to the usefulness of these determinations in the whole 
wheat appears in the announcement by Nasmith, already cited, that 
while gliadin occurs in all portions of the endosperm, glutenin does 
not appear in the aleurone cells. That being the case, it is difficult to 
believe that any given ratio between these constituents in the whole 
wheat could be taken as the one most desirable. The ratio in the 
gluten alone may, however, have an important influence on its 
qualit}^ and a certain definite proportion of each may produce an 
ideal gluten. 

In the light of the present knowledge on the subject, a mechanical 
determination of gluten would seem to be most useful, if it can be 
made with such small quantities of wheat as are obtained from 
single plants, while determinations of gliadin and glutenin in the 
gluten would afford a means of judging of its quality. 

SOME RESULTS OF BREEDING TO INCREASE THE CONTENT OF 
PROTEID NITROGEN. 

Selected plants have been grown on a large scale for two years. 
From these results it is very apparent that a high percentage of 
nitrogen and the qualities that go Math it are transmissible from one 
generation to another. 

In Table 25 are analyses of the plants of the crop of 1902, grouped 
according to their proteid nitrogen content into classes of from 1 to 2 
per cent, 2 to 2.5 per cent, and increasing by 0.5 per cent up to 4.5 
per cent and above. Opposite the plant number of each plant of the 
crop of 1902 are stated its percentage of proteid nitrogen and weight 
of proteid nitrogen in kernels. On the same line are the plant 
numl^ers for the entire progeny in 1903, and following these are the 
percentage of proteid nitrogen, weight of proteid nitrogen per average 
kernel, and average weight of kernel for all of these progeny. 

The averages for each group are given in Table 26. 



96 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 25. — Aimlyses showing transmission o^ nitrogen from one generation to another.^ 
1 TO 2 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



1902 [ 


1903 


Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


1 
Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). • 


Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


^y eight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


32201 


1.51 
1.99 
1.98 
1.94 
1.97 
1.12 
1.83 
1.33 
1.67 
1.38 
1.63 
1.73 
1.89 
1.99 
1.92 






32206-7 

32605-6 and 8. . . 

63505-6 

69505-6.. 

69705 


2.64 
2.62 
2.17 
2.39 
2.50 
2.586 
■ 3.09 
2.628 
2.814 
2.67 
2.576 
2.27 
1.87 
2.85 
2.498 


0.0010055 
.0015963 
. 0007499 
.0009348 
.0003874 
.0016918 
. 0010830 
. 0024129 
. 0024540 
.0006790 
. 0022132 
. 0008092 
.0016125 
.002.5361 
. 0026506 


0.03874 


52601 . .. 






.07560 


6.3501 






.03502 


69501 .... 






.03894 


69701 






. 01550 


73301 






73306-8 


.06582 


91901 






91905-6 

92405-9 


. 03513 


92401 






.09109 


92901 






92905-9 


. 08814 


94101 






94105 

94205-9 


.02543 


94201 






. 08738 


94401 






94406-7 

91605-6 

94905-9 


. 03538 


94601 






.08851 


94901 






. 08899 


95501 






95505-10 

Average . 


.10605 










Average. . 


1.658 






2.587 


.0004960 


. 019907 









n In this table the average percentage of proteid nitrogen for all plants raised in 1903, resulting from 
plants of 1 to 2 per cent, 2 to 2.5 per cent, etc., in 1902 is determined by adding together analyses of 
all plants in that group and dividing by the total number, irrespective of families. 

2 TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17401 


2.45 . 

2.28 

2.33 






1740[5-6] [8-10] . 
34205-8 


2.646 
2.857 
2.54- 


0. 0025803 
.0023077 
. 0018351 


0.09807 


34201 






. 08075 


57301 


0.000601 


0.02585 


57305-8 


.07010 




Average. . 


Average . 






2.353 


.000601 


. 02585 


2.68 


. 00051716 


.019146 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



21701 


2. 50 ' 




21705-11 

33405-8 

Average . 


2.78 
1.977 


0. 0042343 
.0014277 


0. 15101 


33401 


2. 73 




.07274 










Average. . 


2 615 




2.487 

■ 


■ .0005147 


.02032 


I 


' 





3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17301 


3.04 
3.14 
3.31 
3.22 
3.49 
3.05 
3.10 
3.17 
3.28 
3.24 
3.12 
3.00 
3.31 
3.06 
3.33 
3.22 
3.08 
3.46 
3.18 
3.13 
3.44 
3.21 
3.09 
3.33 
3.31 
3.11 
3.11 




j 


17305-8 


3.207 

4.006 

3.64 

2.86 

3.32 

.3.015 

3. 13 

3. 527 

2.768 

2.63 

2.56 

2.93 

2.96 

2.73 

3.41 

2.606 

4.33 

3.12 

3.88 

2.96 

2. 6.36 

2.48 

3.25 

2. .59 

2.88 

4.69 

3.11 


0.0025519 
.002x778 
. 0010439 
. 0034181 
.0006999 
. 0021798 
.0054513 
.0060008 
. 00259*3 
. 0004984 
.0016114 
. 0022229 
. 091.3685 
.0015199 
. 0007126 
.0017186 
. 0008635 
.0006904 
.0007295 
. 0005881 
. 0015390 
.0009112 
. 0013476 
.0005148 
. 0006027 
.0008776 
. 00062.55 


0.07920 


17501 






17505-7 

18905-6 


. 05595 


18901 






. 02863 


20701 






20705-10 

20805 

21305-8 

21805-13 

2190[5-9j [11-13] 
26905-9 


. 12074 


20801 






.02157 


21.301 






.07278 


21801 






. 17668 


21901 






. 16783 


26901 






.09357 


27001 






27005 


.01895 


27201 






27205-7 


.06314 


27301 






27305-8 


.07654 


28801 






28805-6 


.04623 


33101 






33105-7 


. 05574 


33301 






33305 


. 02090 


33601 






33605-7 


. 06614 


34401 


0.000909 
.000948 
.000827 
.000854 
.000685 
.000831 
.000844 
.000693 
. 000933 
.001017 
.000914 


0.02956 
. 02749 
.02602 
.02731 
.01995 
. 02599 
.02732 
. 02081 
.02820 1 
.03271 
.02942 


34405 


. 01994 


34601 

36901 


34606. 


.02213 


36905 


.01880 


37301 


37305 


.01987 


37701 


3770.5-7 

3790.5-6 

38505-6 

.38706 


.05&37 


37901 


.03641 


38501 

38701 


.01227 
.01988 


39401 

40201 


39405 

40205 

40305 


. 02093 
.01871 


40301 


.02011 



BREEDING TO INCREASE PROTEID NITROGEN. 



97 



Table 25. — Analyses showing transmission of nitrogen from one generation to another — 

Continued. 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 





190 


1 






1903 




Record num- 
lier. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nel. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weiglit of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


40401 


3. 32 
3. 23 
3.46 
3.37 
3.24 
3.37 

3. 33 
3.16 
3.49 
3.16 
3.36 
3. 43 
3. 19 
3.36 
3. .33 
3.09 
3.45 
3.25 
3.05 
3. 22 
3^26 
3.10 
3. .35 
3.31 
3.30 
3.15 
3.14 
3.23 
3. 05 
3. .30 
3.14 
3.15 
3.46 
.3.12 
3.16 
3.02 
3.22 
3.17 
3.03 
3.31 
3.26 
.3. 13 
3.25 
3.17 
3.06 
3.23 
3.36 
3.42 
3.39 
.3.10 
3. .36 
3.38 
3.24 
3.14 
3.48 
3.49 
3.29 


0.001039 
.001050 
. 000972 
. 000933 
. 000907 
.000772 
. 000899 
. 0008.53 
.001005 
. 000866 
.000820 
. 000888 
. 000791 
. 000937 
. 000789 
. 000902 
. 000928 
.0008.59 
.000930 
. 000805 
.000808 
.000787 
.000958 
.000894 
. 000785 
. 000781 
.000832 
.000920 
. 000723 

•.000990 


0.03136 
.032.50 
.02813 
. 02766 
.02800 
. 02299 
. 02701 
.02704 
. 02882 
. 02748 
. 02445 
. 02595 
. 02488 
. 02797 
. 02377 
.02928 
. 02697 
.02661 ^ 
. 03052 
. 02507 
.02485 
.02548 
. 02860 
. 02941 
. 02381 
. 02485 
. 02665 
. 02846 
.02.379 
. 03000 


40405 


3.17 

2.82 

2.54 

3.17 

2.92 

4.13 

2.73 

2.38 

3.08 

3.065 

3.06 

2.70 

3.24 

3.17 

1.34 

3.255 

2.83 

2.27 

2. .558 

2.75 

2.495 

2. 706 

2.76 

2.49 

2.60 

2.88 

2.95 

3.01 

2.43 

2.14 

3.25 

2.925 

3.25 

4.42 

3.74 

2.47 

3. 1.55 

4.04 

2. 937 

3.01 

2.48 

1.98 

2.78 

2.486 

3.40 

1.81 

2. 965 

2.94 

2.48 

2.875 

2.63 

2. 595 

2.566 

2.74 

2.67 

3.93 

2. .58 


0.00043.52 
. 0006892 
. 0008988 
. 000.5447 
.0006.594 
. 0006423 
.0016171 
. 0004567 
. 0012867 
.0021750 
. 0010077 
. 0004877 
. 0006149 
. 0010793 
. 0002422 
. 0023714 
. 0010373 
.0017313 
. 0028162 
.0014369 
. 0025326 
. 0013974 
. 0002527 
. 0019599 
. 0021279 
. 0006767 
. 0008052 
. 0003258 
. 0003292 
. 0007684 
. 0003938 
. 0024199 
.0017773 
. 0008767 
.0016495 
.000.5.531 
. 0019005 
.0021643 
.0026515 
. 0005738 
. 00039.30 
. 0004054 
.0014234 
. 0013768 
.0009400 
.0003919 
. 0010576 
.0005704 
. 0005067 
.0011244 
. 0007556 
. 0008522 
.00268.32 
. 00099.33 
. 0020214 
.0012908 
. 0013009 


0.01373 


40501 

42201 


40505 


. 02444 


42205-6 

42905 


.03231 


42901 

43401 

43.501 


. 01866 


43405 

43505 


. 02258 
.01.5.55 


41601 

48101 

48301 

4850 1 


44605-7 


. 05890 


48106 


.01919 


4830.5-6 

48.505-8 


.01235 
.072.53 


48701 


4870.5-6 

48806 

49505 

.50705-6 

51005 


.03287 


4S801 

49.501 . . 


.01798 
.01898 


50701 

51001 

5.5001 

55201 

55.301 

55901 


. 03329 
.01804 


.5.500.5-8 

.55205-6 


. 07295 
. 03688 


55305-8 


.07496 


55905-9 


.11169 


56101 


56105-7 


. 05233 


56'^01 


56205-9 


. 10169 


57001 


5700-5-7 


.05174 


57101 

57401 


57105 


. 00916 


57405-8 


. 07892 


57501 


57506-9 


. 08396 


58201 

58.501 

.58701 


58206-7 


.02318 


58505 


. 02730 


58705 


.01082 


58901 

59601 


58S05 


.01355 


59605-6 


. 03.592 


62801 


62805 _.. 

65305-8 


.01212 


65301 






.08003 


66001 






, 6600.5-6,8 

69305 


. 05529 


69301 






.01984 


69801 






69805-6 


.04.373 


71901 






71905 


.02239 


72401 






72405-6 


.05892 


72601 






72605-7 


. 05274 


79701 






72705-8 


. 08981 


72801 






72806 


.01906 


72901 






72905 


.01.585 


74.301 






74.305 


. 02047 


74501 






74506-8 


. 05084 


74601 






74605-7 


. 05562 


76201 






76205-6 


. 02912 


80301 






80305 


.02165 


81401 






8140.5-6 


. 03583 


81501 






81505 


. 01940 


84401 




84405 


. 02043 


84901 





84905-6 


. 03902 


85201 




85205-6 


.029.37 


86101 




86105-6 


. 03244 


88601 




88605-9 


.11179 


88901 




88905-6 


. 03625 


92201 






9220.5-8 


. 07575 


9'^301 






92.305-6 . ... 


. 03223 


95701 ... 


9570.5-7 


.0.5017 








Average . 




Average . 


3.239 


.000875 


.02700 


2.932 


. 00056037 


. 019189 



3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



18801 


3.55 
3.50 
3. 65 
3.63 
.3.76 
3.58 






18S05 

2120.5-12 

22205-11 

2520.5-6 

2610.5-7 


2.02 

3..567 

3.165 

2. 735 

3.19 

2.688 


0. 0003164 
. 0054768 
. 0037042 
.0011894 
. 0015273 
.0028791 


O.OIE 


21201 






.1.56 


22201 






.117 


2.5201 


.04C 


26101 






.05 


27501... . 


27505-9 


.107 













27889— No. 78—05- 



98 

Table 2.5. 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

-Analyses showing transmission of nitrogen from one generation to another- 
Continued. 

3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



1903 


1903 


Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


Record num- 
ber. 


1 Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
\ in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

keniel 

(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


3.3901 


3.59 
3.82 
3.79 
3.98 
3.65 
3.55 
3.63 
3.57 
3.79 
3.87 
3.55 
3.87 
3.53 
3.61 
3.55 
3.79 
3.76 
3.80 
.3.64 
3.80 
3.53 
3.91 
3.78 
3.57 
3.56 






33905-6 

38005 


2. 21 

.[ 2.84 
.\ 3.718 
.[ 2.11 
.! .2.975 
. 1 2. 37 
3. 07 
2.94 
3.58 
2. 365 
.1 4.18 
.1 1.84 
. 1 2. 90 
3. 62 
.! 2.846 
.' 2. .555 
.! 2. .37 
2.87 
' 3.18 
2.31 
1.87 
2.82 
2.27 
3.21 
3.32 


0. 0008932 
.00051.35 
.0036318 
. 0004407 
. 0013536 
.0003177 
. 0006927 
.0005187 
.0004927 
.0006777 
.0007155 
.0002700 
. 0020794 
.0010640 
.0016285 
.0022.356 
.001.5451 
.0005207 
. 0003556 
.0009.317 
.0003180 
.0016570 
.0031019 
.0007197 
.0017483 


0.04115 


38001 


0. 000806 
.001046 
.001039 
.001048 
.000927 
.001.327 
. 000796 
.001020 
.001238 
.000865 
.001146 
. 000993 
.001043 
.001020 
.001050 
.0010.30 
.000891 
. 000852 
.000904 
. 000759 


0.02110 

. 02765 
.02616 
.02877 
. 02619 
.02838 
.02531 
.02690 
.0.3205 
.02435 
.02963 
. 02822 
.02898 
. 02866 
.02775 
.02750 
.02.353 
.02348 
.02384 
.02155 


. 01808 


38601 


38605-9 

39205 

39506-7 


. 09917 


39201 . . 


. 02089 


39501 


. 04.568 


39601 


.39606 

42405 

44.505 

4.5005 

4.5605-6 


.01341 


42401 


. 02251 


44501 


.01764 


45001 


. 01376 


45601 


. 02995 


45701 


45705. 


.01712 


45801 


4.5S05 

4840.5-9 

49905 

55506-8 

.5.5605-8 


.01234 


48401 


.07511 


49901 


. 029.39 


55501 


. 05743 


5.5601 


. 08822 


57601 


57606-8 


.06535 


57801 


.57805 


.01814 


57901 


57905 

.5880.5-6 

60605 


.01118 


58801 


. 04048 


60601 


. 01701 


63101 


63105-7 

81705-10 

91.305 

92.50.5-7 

Average 


. 05951 


81701 . ... 




1 


. 13635 


91.301 






. 02242 


92501 


. 05312 










Average . 


3.68 


. 000990 


.026.50 


2. 906 


. 0005508 


. 019204 



4 TO 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



26801 


4.07 
4. .30 
4.00 




2680.5-8 


2.825 


0.0023073 


0. 08179 


28201 




28206 


.3.07 .0006126 
2.69 .0014772 


. 01996 


46101 


0. 000988 


0.02472 


4610.5-7 


. 05495 




Average . 




Average . 


4.123 


.000988 


.02472 


2.806 


.0005496 

1 


. 019588 



MORE THAN 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



50901 


4.95 


0. 001074 


0.02171 


50905-6 


3.435 


0.0008992 


0. 02001 




Average . 












3. 435 


.0004496 

1 


. 010005 













Table 26. — Summary of analyses, shoioing transmission of nitrogen from one generation to 

another. 





1903 


1903 


Range of percentage of 
proteid nitrogen. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram) . 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram) . 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram) . 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


1 to 2 


1.66 
2.35 
2.61 
3.24 
3.68 
4.12 
4.95 


15 
3 
2 
84 
31 
3 
1 






2.59 
2.68 
2.49 
2.93 
2.91 
2.81 
3.43 


46 

13 

11 

199 

79 
8 
2 


0.0004960 
. 0005172 
.0005147 
. 0005604 
. 0005.508 
. 0005496 
.0004496 


0.01991 


2 to 2.5 


6. oooeoi 


0. 02585 


.01915 


2. 5 to 3 


. 02032 


3 to 3. 5 


.000875 
.000990 
.000988 
. 001074 


. 02700 
.02650 
. 02472 
.02171 


.01919 


3. 5 to 4 


.01920 


4 to 4. 5 


.01959 


4. 5 and over 


.01000 







BEEEDING TO TIsrCREASE PROTEID NITROGEN. 



99 



In Table 26 the averages for each group are stated. This table is 
designed to show whether there has been a tendency for plants of a 
certain class to reproduce the qualities pertaining to that class, or 
whether these are lost in the offspring. 

It is unfortunate that there are not a greater number of analyses of 
plants of medium and of low nitrogen content. The plants selected 
for reproduction in 1903 were largely those of high nitrogen content, 
and, consequently, comparatively few analyses of the low nitrogen 
and medium nitrogen plants of 1903 are at hand. 

Table 25 shows that in the main there is a tendency for each class 
of plants to reproduce in the same relation to the other classes, but 
that there is less difference between the extreme classes in the off- 
spring than in the parent plants. In other words, while all plants 
tend to reproduce their own qualities, those plants varying widely 
from the average produce, in general, offspring varying from the 
average less widely than did the parents. Although this is a rule, its 
application to the individual is not universal. Certain plants may be 
found whose tendency to variation extends through both generations. 
There is also wide variation between certain plants of the same 
parent. For instance, the plants numbered from 21205 to 21212, all 
of which come from the same parent, vary from 2.16 to 5.23 per cent 
in proteid nitrogen content, while plants 69805 and 69806 vary from 
5.82 to 1.66 per cent in this constituent.^' 

It would seem, therefore, entirely reasonable to believe that a very 
considerable increase in the proteid nitrogen content of wheat may bo 
effected by careful and continuous reproduction from plants of high 
proteid nitrogen content. 

Table 27 contains the analyses of plants raised in 1902 and their 
progeny raised in 1903, arranged according to the number of grams of 
proteid nitrogen contained in the average kernel of the former. 

Table 27. — Analyses showing transmission of proteid nitrogen in average kernel. 





1903 


1903 


Range of proteid nitrogen 
in average kernel 
(gram). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram) . 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram) . 


Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


0.000600 to 0.000700 

0.000700 to 0.000800 

O.OOOSOO to 0.000900 

0.000900 to 0.001000 

0.001000 and over . . 


0. 000659 
.000776 
.000850 
.0009,38 
. 001077 


3 
9 
18 
18 
15 


3.03 
3.29 
3.33 
3.37 
3.71 


0. 02220 
. 02405 
.02576 
. 02796 
.02880 


0. 000496 

.000444 

.000.544 

1 .000514 

.000593 


8 
15 
38 
35 

28 


2.59 
2.68 
2.91 
2.89 
3.06 


0.01895 
.01673 

.01875 
.01784 
. 01905 







« Table 25 represents the properties of each plant grown in 1903 arranged according to 
immediate families. For instance, plants numbered 17305-17308 are all the offspring of 
the same plant grown in 1902. The parent bears the number 17301. This is the system 
of records devised by Prof. W. M. Hays, formerly of the University of Minnesota. 



tore 



lUO 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 28. — Analyses showing transmission of kernel weight. 






1903 


1903 


Range of weight of aver- 
age kernel (gram). 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid | 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 
• 


Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Below 024 


0.02253 
. 02515 
.02709 
. 02878 
.03152 


12 
12 
18 
16 
6 


3.61 
3.28 
3.43 
3.41 
3.31 


0.000811 
.000813 
.000927 
.000993 
.001044 


0.01684 
.01740 
.01947 
. 01875 
. 01869 


19 
28 
3.S 
31 
12 


2.69 


0. 000450 


0.024 to 0.026 


2.88 ! .000503 


026 to 0.028 


2.91 1 .000.562 


0.02S to 0.0.30 

0.0.30 and over 


2.98 ; .000573 
2.96 .000548 









Table 28 shows the analyses of plants raised in 1902 and their prog- 
eny raised in 1903, arranged according to weight of average kernel. 
There is more variation in this table tlian in the preceding one, but 
the tendency toward transmission of proteid nitrogen in the average 
kernel may be noted. The averages for 1902 are much higher than 
for 1903, owing partly to the higher percentage and partly to greater 
kernel weight. 

The weight of the average kernel shows some tendency toward 
transmission, although there are some variations. It will be noticed 
that the kernels average much heavier in 1902 than in 1903, and that 
in spite of this the percentage of proteid nitrogen is higher in 1902. 
The relation of light kernel and high percentage of nitrogen does not 
therefore appear to hold as between crops of different years. 

All of the qualities of which determinations have been made in 
both years appear to be transmitted. It may be safely assumed that 
certain plants will have greater power to transmit these qualities than 
will the average plant. Such plants w411 assert themselves in the 
course of three or four generations. From these plants individuals 
may be selected that have a combination of the desired qualities. 

YIELD OF GRAIN AS AFFECTED BY SUSCEPTIBILITY TO COLD. 

As has already been stated, a large number of plants on the breed- 
ing plots were killed during the winter of 1902-3. This afforded an 
opportunity to ascertain the effect of the severe weather upon the 
surviving plants. The question arose whether the surviving plants of 
a family of which a large percentage of members were killed yielded 
less per plant than the plants of a family of which but a small per- 
centage had succumbed. As each spike of the crop of 1902 was 
represented by a number of plants, and as records of each plant 
were available, there were very extensive data at hand from which 
to secure information on the subject. 

In Table 29 the surviving plants of each immediate family, or, in 
other words, the surviving plants descended from the same plant of 
the previous year, are classified according to the percentage of plants 
that survived the winter. Thus all plants of which only from 10 to 20 



YIELD AS AFFECTED BY SUSCEPTIBILITY TO COLD. 



101 



per cent survived are orrouped together. In the next class are all 
plants of which from 20 to 80 per cent survived. The other classes 
increase by 10 per cent surviving plants until 70 per cent is reached. 
All plants of which more than 70 per cent survived form the last class. 

Table 30 gives a summary of Table 29, the averages for each class 
being shown. From this table it will be seen that with an increase 
in the proportion of surviving plants there is an increase in the 
weight of grain per plant and in the number of kernels per plant. 
It is therefore to be concluded that decrease in yield from winter- 
killing is due not only to the loss of plants that are destroyed, but 
also to a decreased yield from most of the surviving plants. 

Table 30 also shows that the weight of the average kernel is not 
affected b}^ the freezing of a large proportion of the family, the 
decreased yield being due, it may be assumed, to the decreased 
number of kernels, owing to a decreased ability to tiller. 
, With an increase in the proportion of surviving plants there is, 
perhaps, a slight decrease in the percentage of proteid nitrogen in 
the kernels and in the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
average kernel, although this is so slight and so irregular that it 
would not be safe to draw any conclusions from it. The total pro- 
duction of proteid nitrogen per plant naturally increases. 

Table 29. — Yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family. 
10 TO 20 PER CENT. 





Percent- 
age of 


Weight 




Weight 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 


Proteid 


Record number 
for 1902. 


plants 
In 1903 


of ker- 
nels on 


Num- 
ber of 


of aver- 
age 


nitrogen 
in kei'- 


nitrogen 
in average 


surviv- 


plant 


kernels. 


kernel 


nels 


kernel 




ing from 
1902. 


(gram). 




(gram). 


(gram). 


(gram). 


18801 


11.1 


2. 1462 


137 


0. 01567 


2.02 


0.04335 


0.0003164 


20801 


10. 


14.6942 


697 


.021.57 


3.32 


.48784 


.0006999 


2.5201 


18.2 


7.7295 


363 


.02173 


2.73 


. 20732 


.0005947 


33301 


16.7 


2.9905 


156 


.01858 


2.73 


. 07566 


.0005066 


37301 


16.7 
14.3 


6. 1394 
2.5134 


309 
139 


.01987 
.01808 


2.96 
2.84 


. 18173 
.07138 


. OOO088I 
.0005135 


38001 


39201 


16.7 


21.. 5399 


1,031 


.02089 


2.11 


. 45435 


.0004407 


39401 


16.7 


9. 3541 


447 


.02093 


2.88 


.21399 


. 0006027 


40201 


14.3 


3. 6302 


194 


.01871 


4.69 


. 17026 


.0008776 


40401 


16.7 


.6316 


46 


.01373 


3.17 


.02002 


.0004352 


42901 


16.7 


1.2499 


67 


.01866 


3.17 


.036.50 


.0005447 


43401 


16.7 


2.8000 


124 


.022.58 


2.92 


.08176 


.0006594 


44501 


16.7 


5.9990 


340 


.01764 


2.94 


. 17637 


.0005187 


45001 


16.7 


3.2340 


235 


.01376 


3.58 


. 11575 


.0004927 


45701 


14.3 


. 7532 


44 


.01712 


4.18 


.03148 


.0007155 


45801 


16.7 


1.5298 


124 


.01234 


1.84 


.02815 


.00027(10 


49501 


14.3 


1.2716 


67 


.01898 


3.24 


.04120 


.0006149 


49901 


14.3 


.6760 


23 


. 02939 


3.62 


.02436 


.0010640 


51001 


16.7 


15.5835 


862 


.01804 


1.34 


.20881 


.0002422 


57101 


16.7 


3. 7263 


407 


.00916 


2.76 


.10285 


.0002527 


58.501 


16.7 


7.4516 


273 


.02730 


2.95 


.21982 


.0008052 


.58701 


16.7 
16.7 


2. 5436 
2.3031 


235 
170 


.01082 
.013.55 


3.01 
2.43 


.076,56 
.05.596 


.0003258 
.0003292 


58901 


60601 


16.7 


.5952 


35 


.01701 


1.87 


.01113 


.0003180 


62801 


16.7 


1.3451 


HI 


.01212 


3.25 


. 04272 


. 0003938 


69301 


16.7 


2.0430 


103 


.01984 


4.42 


. 09030 


.0008767 


74301 


16.7 


4.4222 


216 


.02047 


1.98 


.087.56 


.0004054 


84401 


16.7 


8. 7448 


428 


.02043 


2.48 


. 21687 


.0005067 


91301 


14.3 


3.0940 


138 


.02242 


3.21 


.09932 


.0007197 


94101 

Average . . 


14.3 


.5.595 


22 


.02543 


2.67 


.01494 


.0006790 


15.78 


4. 7098 


251.4 


.01856 


2.91 


. 12294 


.00051366 



102 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 29. — Yields of plants , arranged according to percentage Mlled in each family — Cont'd. 

20 TO 30 PER CENT. 



Record number 
for 1902. 



18901 

27001 

34601 

36901 , 

39601 

40301 

40501 

42201 

42401 

43.501 

48701 

48801 

57801 

57901 

58801 

71901 

80301 

81501 

91901 

94601 

Average . 



Percent- 
age of 
plants 
in 1903 
surviv- 
ing from 
1902. 



20.0 
20.0 
28.6 
20.0 
28.6 
25.0 
20.0 
25.0 
20.0 
25.0 
28.6 
25.0 
20.0 
25.0 
28.6 
20.0 
20.0 
20.0 
22.2 
28.6 



23.5 



Weight 
of ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram) . 



1.2046 
16.4120 
6. 1962 
5.0200 
4.6383 
3. 6003 
4. 1546 
1.0827 
1.4892 
1.4464 
5.2800 
9.8346 
4. 8988 
2.4731 
12.5470 
28. 2136 
1.^1. 7835 
2. 8327 
3.4961 
6. 2877 



6. 84457 



Num- 

t)er of 

kernels. 



84 

866 

280 

267 

346 

179 

170 

59 

66 

93 

321 

547 

270 

221 

626 

1,260 

729 

146 

199 

106 



Weight 
of a ver- 

age 
kernel 
(gram). 



0.01431 
.01895 
.02213 
. 01880 
.01341 
.02011 
.02444 
.01615 
.02251 
.01,555 
. 01643 
.01798 
.01814 
.01118 
. 02024 
. 02239 
. 02165 
. 01940 
.017.56 
. 04425 



341.75 .019779 



Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 



3.64 
2.63 
3.12 
3.88 
2.37 
3.11 
•2.82 
2.54 
3.07 
4.13 
3.06 
2.70 
2.87 
3.18 
2.31 
2.47 
1.81 
2.94 
3.09 
1.87 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels 
(gram). 



0. 04437 
. 43164 
. 19332 
. 19478 
.10967 
.11197 
.11716 
. 03587 
.04572 
.05974 
. 16124 
.26553 
. 14060 
.07859 
.33.541 
. 69688 
. 28569 
.08328 
. 10771 
.11373 



. 18065 



Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 



0. 0005219 
. 0004984 
. 0006904 
. 0007295 
. 0003177 
. 0006255 
. 0006892 
. 0004494 
.0006927 
.0006423 
.0005038 
. 0004877 
. 0005207 
. 0003556 
. 0004658 
.0005531 
.0003919 
. 0005704 
.000.5415 
.0008062 



.0005527 



30 TO 40 PER CENT. 



26101 

28201 

28801 

33901 

37901 

38501 

38701 

18301 

.50901 

,59601 , 

69701. , 

88901 

92301 

Average . 



33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
37.5 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 

33.6 



1.9790 


122 


4.3698 


219 


8. 3240 


386 


6.7169 


313 


.5757 


28 


5.03306 


252 


7.2545 


365 


7.3424 


315 


2.0631 


167 


8. 44.56 


474 


3. 7810 


244 


7. 6051 


419 


4. 1975 


253 


5. 2065 


273.6 



0. 01704 
. 01996 
.02311 
. 02057 
.01820 
.01814 
. 01988 
.02117 
.01000 
.01796 
. 01.550 
.01812 
.01611 



.01813 



3.19 
3.07 
2.96 
2.21 
2.48 
3.25 
2.59 
3.08 
3.43 
2.14 
2. .50 
2.74 
3.93 



2.! 



0. 06318 
. 13415 
. 2.5019 
. 12186 
. 01447 
.24284 
. 18789 
.21633 
.07041 
. 18099 
.094.53 
. 20632 
. 18308 



, 15125 



0. 0005091 
.0006126 
.000(i,S42 
.0004466 
. 00045.56 
.C0l)673S 
.000514S 
. 000ti433 
. 0004496 
. 0003842 
. 0003,S74 
.00049116 
. 0006454 



.0005310 



40 TO 50 PER CENT. 



17501 


42.9 
44.4 
42.9 
42.9 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
44.4 
42.9 
42.9 


1.1495 
4. 6950 
2.9905 
1. 8251 
.5329 
8. 3672 
2.0970 
2. 6462 
6. 9409 
2. 9064 
5. 3261 
4. 1705 
5. 4034 
8.6610 


55 


n.nis65 


4.01 
3.01 
2.73 
2.73 
3.17 
3.15 
3.01 
2.48 
3.40 
2.96 
2.59 
2.67 
3.32 
2.27 


0.04268 
. 14144 
.07566 
. 04998 
.01712 
.26913 
. 06312 
.06.563 
. 22024 
.07905 
. 14008 
.11199 
. 16649 
.20040 


0. 0007259 
. 000.3449 
. 0005066 
. 0005390 
. 00O.5396 
.0009502 
. 0005738 
.0003930 
. 0004700 
. 00052SS 
. 0004261 
. 000,50.53 
.000.5828 
.0004046 


21301 ...■•. 


2,59 1 .01819 
156 ' .01858 
93 .01963 
32 : .01664 
321 .02946 
110 .01906 
167 : .01,585 
472 - 01 4.=lfi 


33101 


44601 .... 


50701 


72401 . . 


72801 


72901 


76201 


81401 . 


156 
314 
238 
297 
484 


.01791 
. 01622 
.01894 
.01771 
.01769 


86101 


92201 . . 


92501 


94401 


Average 


41.7 


4. 1223 


225.3 .01843 


2.96 


.11736 


. 0005493 



YIELD AS AFFECTED BY SUSCEPTIBILITY TO COLD. 



103 



Table 29. — Yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family — Cont'd. 

50 TO 60 PER CENT. 



Record number 
for 1902. 


Percent- 
age of 
plants 
m 1903 
surviv- 
ing from 
1902. 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels 
(gram). 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


17301 


50.0 
.54.5 
50.0 
50.0 
50.0 
.50.0 
,57. 1 
.50.0 
.50. 
50.0 
.50.0 
.50.0 
,57. 1 
50.0 
.50.0 
50.0 
57.1 


3.0000 
11.7777 
6. ()626 
12.9727 
5. 2333 
6. 0463 
6. 8220 
4. 1993 
1.9040 
2. 3719 
4.8728 
6.0242 
9. 3804 
4.7193 
7.2278 
4. 2040 
5.6295 


156 
581 
327 
611 
271 
273 
328 
237 
89 
140 
273 
309 
435 
224 
334 
295 
266 


0.01980 
.01961 
.02012 
.02105 
.01818 

-.02205 
. 02019 
.01946 
.02284 
.01497 
.01832 
.01844 
.02178 
.01984 
.02186 
.01468 
.02236 


3.21 
2.65 
2.85 
2.56 
1.98 
2.61 
2.86 
2.64 
2.97 
2.36 
2.69 
2.83 
2.37 
2.82 
3.74 
2.63 
2.57 


0. 09556 
.30061 
. 18906 
.31.509 
. 10621 
. 14759 
. 18949 
.12164 
.05663 
.048.52 
.13084 
. 15608 
.18680 
. 12281 
.17078 
. 11078 
.14178 


0. 0006380 
.0(K)516l 
. (X)05f97 
.000.5371 
0003569 
.0005729 
. 0005769 
.0005130 
.0006768 
.0003388 
.0004924 
.00051,S6 
.00051.50 
.0005.523 
. 0008247 
.0003778 
.0005366 


17401 


20701 

27201 


33401 

33601 

34201 

37701 


39501 


4.j(i01 


4611)1 


55201 

57601 


63101 


69801 


85201 


88G01 


Average 


51.5 


6.0616 


302.9 


.01974 


2.73 


. 15237 


.0005361 







60 TO 7 


PER 


CENT. 








21201 


66.7 
60.0 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
60.0 
66.7 
66.7 
66. 7 
60.0 
66.7 
60.0 
66. 7 
66.7 
60.0 
66.7 
62.5 
60.0 


2. 5064 
5.8304 
2.9653 

11.6655 
6.0446 
8.6833 
5. 4606 

10.4714 
5.0125 
7. 7761 
7.6312 
8.1116 
4. 1723 
5.9586 
4.6412 
9.3629 
7. 7977 
8.3679 
4.1284 

• 4.6848 
5.4211 


137 
288 
166 
608 
341 
476 
280 
529 
319 
443 
383 
382 
229 
309 
265 
396 
354 
451 
209 
258 
318 


0.01956 
.01937 
.01890 
.01919 
.01813 
.01824 
.01874 
.01914 
.01725 
.01752 
.01973 
.02099 
.01791 
.01919 
.01758 
.02245 
.02194 
.01854 
.01951 
.01763 
.01672 


3.57 
2.64 
2.62 
2.38 
3.06 
3.25 
2.27 
2.85 
2.71 
2. .54 
2.49 

2.m 

2.17 
3.25 
4.04 
2.94 
2. .59 
2.49 
2.87 
2.81 
2.58 


0.09431 
.11603 
.05309 
.27765 
. 18124 
.25347 
. 12536 
.29155 
. 13688 
.20018 
. 19910 
.20327 
.06748 
.17.590 
. 14328 
.28276 
.21334 
.20681 
. 13763 
. 12877 
.14079 


0. 0006846 
.000.5027 
.0006177 
.0004.567 
.0005437 
.0005928 
.0004328 
.0005428 
.0004658 
.0004588 
.0004900 
.0005320 
.0003749 
.0005924 
.0007214 
.0006629 
.0005639 
.0004589 
.0005622 
.0004908 
.0004336 


32201 


32601 


48101 . ... 


48501 


55001 


5.5301 


55501 


57001 


57301 


57401 


57501 


63501 


60001 


72601 


79701 


73301 


74601 

84901 


92901 


95701 


Average 


64.6 


6.5092 


340 


.01896 


2.80 


.17280 


.0005324 



70 PER CENT AND OVER. 



21701 


87.5 
80.0 
88.9 
87.5 
80.0 
71.4 
80.0 
71.4 
71.4 
83.3 
83.3 
83.3 
75.0 
83.3 
75.0 
83.3 
100.0 
100.0 
71.4 
83.3 
75.0 
100.0 


9. 75524 

11., 5721 

8. 3406 

4.0677 

7. 1981 

3. 8910 

6. 6162 

6.8618 

3.9532 

4. 4668 

10. 2785 

10. 9242 

10. 7383 

11.2241 

2.8084 

7.5858 

3.4799 

12. 7593 

4.4131 

5.9603 

7.0172 

7.2956 


447 

622 

398 

229 

329 

206 

343 

310 

186 1 

277 

435 

489 

617 

563 

227 

394 

191 

569 

234 

339 

388 

374 


0. 02157 
.01963 
.02114 
.01674 
.02045 
.01871 
.01913 
.02152 
.01983 
.01.502 
.02211 
.02234 
.01744 
. 02034 
.01159 
.02001 
.01695 
.02272 
.01822 
.01748 
.D1780 
.01767 


2.78 
3.13 
3. .53 
3.16 

2.82 

2.77 

2.93 

2.69 ! 

3.72 1 

2.90 

2.55 

2.56 

2.75 

2.49 

2.88 

2.92 

2.78 1 

2.27 

2.63 

2.58 

2.85 

2. ,50 


0.30200 
.3.5575 
.30995 
.12604 
.20306 
. 10870 
.18438 
. 17267 
. 11558 
. 100.33 
.29008 
.27788 
.29783 
.27997 
.08385 
. 18248 
. 103.55 
.29500 
. 12426 
. 16548 
.21294 
. 18689 


0. 0006049 
. 0006057 
.0007501 
. 0005292 
.0005768 
. 0005189 
.000.5447 
. 0005758 
.0007264 
.00041.59 
. 000,5589 
.0005632 
. 0004790 
.000.5065 
0003383 
. 0006050 
.0004745 
.0005170 
.0004826 
.0(X)4426 
. 0Ot).5O72 
.0004418 


21801 


21901 


22201 

26.801 


26901 


27301 


27.501 


38601 


48401 


55601 


55901 


56101 


56201 


58201 


65301 


74501 


81701 


92401 


94201 


94901 


95501 


Average 


82.4 


7.3275 


371.2 


. 01902 


2.83 


.20357 


.0005348 



104 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

Table 30. — Summary of yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family. 



Percentage of plants 
grouped according 
to survivors of 1903 
from 1902. 


Num- 
ber of 

analy- 
ses. 


Percent- 
age of 
plants in 
1903 sur- 
viving 
from 1902. 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(grams). 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels 

per 
plant. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram) 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


10 to 20 


30 
20 
13 
14 
17 
21 
22 


15.8 
23.5 
33. fi 
41.7 
51.5 
64.6 
82.4 


4.7098 
6.8446 
5. 2065 
4.1223 
6.0616 
6.5092 
7.3275 


251 
342 
274 
225 
303 
340 
371 


0.01856 
. 01978 
.01813 
.01843 
.01974 
.01896 
.01902 


2.91 
2.88 
2.89 
2.96 
, 2.73 
2.80 
2.83 


0. 12294 
. 18065 
. 15125 
.11736 
. 15237 
.17280 
. 20357 


0. 0005437 


20 to 30 


. 0005527 


30 to 40 


.0005310 


40 to 50 


. 0005493 


50 to 60 


.0005361 


60 to 70 


. 0005324 




. 0005348 







YIELD AND NITROGEN CONTENT OF GRAIN AS AFFECTED BY 
LENGTH OF GROWING PERIOD. 

Early-maturing varieties of w^ieat are, in general, better yielding 
sorts in Nebraska than are later maturing ones. There are some 
exceptions to this rule, however, Turkish Red yielding better than 
any earlier maturing variety. The advantages from early maturity 
have usually been ascribed to the cooler weather and greater supply 
of moisture that obtain in the early summer. The hot, dry weather 
common in July is thought to prevent the filling out of the kernel and 
to cause light yield and light volume weight. 

Each w^heat plant on the breeding plots was harvested separately 
in 1903, and a record was kept of the date of harvesting of each of 
these plants. These data have been tabulated for the purpose of 
showing the relation betw^een the length of the growing season and 
the yield of grain from individual plants of the same variety. 

Table 31 contains these data, tabulated according to the date of 
ripening. Plants ripening betw^een the 7th and 11th of July, 1903, 
form the first class, those ripening between July 1 1 and 15 the second 
class, and the succeeding classes increase by four days until July 27, all 
ripening after that date constituting the last class. The dates of 
ripening thus extend over a period of three weeks. 

The season of 1903 w-as a very wet and cool one. The effect of 
this upon the wheat crop is shown by the fact that the crop in the 
field was not ready to harvest until July 10, while usually it is har- 
vested betw^een the 20th and 30th of June. Even at the close of the 
ripening period the weather did not become dry or hot as compared 
with the normal season. It will therefore be seen that the ordinary 
advantages from early maturity did not obtain, or at least not in the 
customary w^ay. It may also be said that some of the later maturing 
wheats yielded as w^ell in 1904 as did the Turkish Red. 

Table 32 is a summary of Table 31, with a statement of the average 
for each class. 

Table 33 is a summary of the same plants, tabulated according to 
the yield of grain per plant. 



YIELD, ETC. , AS AFFECTED BY GROWING PERIOD. 



105 



Table 34 is a summary of the same plants, tabulated according to 
the percentage of proteid nitrogen. 

It is very evident from these tables that the early-maturing plants 
are the most prolific. The weight of the average kernel remains very 
uniform, so that the later maturing plants do not appear to have pro- 
duced shrunken kernels. Evidently the plants ripening during the 
first four days produced the largest amounts of grain, and their ker- 
nels were as heavy as those produced later. The smaller productive- 
ness of the later maturing plants in the season of 1903 does not appear 
to have been due to a shrunken or light kernel. 

The percentage of proteid nitrogen appears to be somewhat less in 
the grain of the early-maturing plants. The number of grams of 
proteid nitrogen in the average kernel is likewise less in these early- 
maturing plants. 

The relation of length of growing season to both yield and compo- 
sition of grain is contrary to what might have been supposed. A 
long growing period without excessivel}^ hot or dry weather might 
naturally be thought to increase the yield and increase the percentage 
of carbohydrates in the grain. 

The season of 1904 was very similar to that of 1903 up to time of 
wheat harvest. The data for 1904, when tabulated, will serve as a 
check on the results obtained in 1903. 



Table .31 . — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing period. 
DATES RIPE: JULY 7 TO 11, 1903. 



Record number. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 
(grams) . 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age Icer- 

nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


21805 


Juh- 10 


20. 9290 


2.69 


0.01699 


0. 56299 


0. 0004569 


2180fi 


....do... 


14.2450 


2.71 


.02378 


. 38604 


.0006444 


21807 


....do... 


9.4172 


2.73 


. 02498 


. 25709 


. 0006664 


21808 


....do... 


19. 7446 


2.57 


.01708 


. 50744 


. 0004389 


21809 


....do... 


8.0214 


2.73 


.01919 


. 21898 


.0005238 


21810 


....do... 


1.0304 


2.69 


. 019816 


.02772 


. 0005330 


21811 


....do... 


11.9114 


3.75 


.021007 


.44666 


. 0007877 


21812 


....do... 


14.8139 


4.26 


.01507 


.63107 


. 0006420 


21813 


....do... 


4. 0258 


4.04 


.01877 


. 16377 


. 0007582 


55506 


Julv 8 


17.8506 


2.80 


.02062 


.49995 


.0005773 


55507 


....do... 


9. 8228 


2.63 


. 01949 


. 25834 


.0005126 


55605 


....do... 


10. 9180 


2.64 


.02184 


.28823 


. 0005765 


55606 


....do... 


11.0930 


2.58 


. 02205 


. 28580 


. 0005690 


55607 


....do... 


2.3931 


2.69 


.01734 


.06437 


. 0004665 


55608 


....do... 


22. 5848 


2.31 


.02699 


.52194 


.0006236 


55905 


....do... 


5. 7948 


2.67 


.01751 


. 15470 


. 0004674 


55906 


July 7 


7.9968 


2.81 


.01603 


.22471 


. 0004503 


55907 


Julv 8 


19. 3966 


2.59 


.02590 


.50238 


. 0006707 


55908 


....do... 


12. 1221 


2.42 


.02175 


.29575 


. 0005262 


.55909 


July 9 


9. 2120 


2.30 


.03050 


.21187 


.0007016 


56106 


July 8 


12.0161 


2.57 


.01866 


.30881 


. 0004795 


56107.. 


July 7 
July 8 


14.4556 
9. 3093 


2.96 
2.42 


.01658 
.01829 


.42790 
.22529 


. 0004907 
. 0004426 


56206 


56207 


....do... 


10. 9073 
13.5720 


2.34 
2.61 


.02361 
. 02356 


.25.522 
.34616 


. 0005524 
. aX)6149 


56208 


....do... 


56209 


....do... 


15. 8086 


2.59 


. 01664 


.40945 


. 0004310 


81505 


July 10 


2.8327 


2.94 


. 01940 


.08328 


. 0005704 


81706 


July 8 


15. 3928 


2.71 


. 02132 


.41715 


. 0005778 


81707 


....do... 


18.3614 


2.34 


.02336 


. 42965 


. 0005466 


81708 


....do... 


7.3993 


2.41 


.02578 


. 17833 


. 0006213 


81709 


....do... 


16.4692 


2.28 


.02175 


. 37548 


.0004960 



106 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 31. — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

period— Continued . 

DATES RIPE: JULY 7 TO 11, 1903— Continued. 



Record number. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 
(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


81710 


July 8 
July 10 
do.. . 


9.1411 

1.6362 

9. 9456 

5. 1584 

1.5355 

9.8719 

12.1918 

2.3678 

3. 6977 

.3146 

11.0548 

12. 1592 

14.4617 

2.9475 

2. &356 

10. 3426 

5.1629 

.7577 


1.92 
2.80 
2.53 
2.61 
2.47 
2.42 
2.94 
1.96 
3.60 
2.81 
2.74 
2.59 
2.56 
2.48 
1.81 
2.54 
2.73 
2.47 


0.02308 
. 02731 
. 02068 
. 02205 
.02075 
.02100 
.01948 
.01894 
.01696 
.00850 
.01852 
.02029 
.01954 
.02136 

-.01783 
. 01626 
. 01934 
.01457 


0. 17550 
. 04581 
.25162 
. 13463 
.03793 
.23890 
.35844 
.04641 
. 13312 
.00884 
.30291 
.31492 
.37023 
.07310 
. 05132 
. 26270 
.14095 
.01872 


0.0004432 
.0007640 
. 0005231 
. 0005754 
.0005125 
.0005082 
.0005726 
.0003713 
.0006106 
.0002389 
.0005074 
.0005515 
. 0005003 
. 0005297 
.0003228 
.0004131 
. 0005279 
. 0003599 


88605 


88606 


88607 

88608 


....do... 
....do... 


88609 


....do... 


94907 


....do... 


94908 


....do... 


94909 


July 9 

do... 

....do... 


95505 

95506 


95507 

9.5.508 

95509 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


95510 


....do... 


95705 


July 10 
do ... 


95706 


95707 


do ... 


Average . . . 




July 8. 9 


9.9067 


2.69 


.02024 


.26475 


.0005.356 



DATES RIPE: JULY 11 TO 15, 1903. 



21905 


July 13 
....do... 


14.3111 

10. 4800 

2.9248 

3. 5574 

12. 1819 

8. 4593 

9. 72.36 

10. 1925 

2. 6965 

6.0173 

11. 5675 

16. 4120 

16. 4061 

19. 1854 

3. 3266 

5. 5666 

13. .3011 

3. 0850 

4.5123 

12.0399 

10.0005 

5. 5S24 

3. 2964 

11.2890 

. .3485 

6. 4302 

9. 4585 

1. 6036 

11.2008 

9.8346 

7.9684 

7. 1852 

2. 5160 

4. 1323 

5.6864 

9. 5078 

5.7431 

6. 5232 

1. 5364 
10. 1836 

3. 3176 
3. 7263 
8. 5777 
7. 9772 
4.7117 
9.8378 
.8328 

2. 4923 
14.9992 


2.64 

3.18 

3.35 

3.82 

4.43 

5.48 

2.31 

3.01 

2.81 

3.17 

3.17 

2.63 

2.41 

2.36 

2.92 

2.58 

3.47 

2.53 

4.15 

2.12 

2.70 

2.64 

4.87 

1.50 

2.81 

2.02 

.3.20 

2.64 

2.76 

2.70 

3.05 

3.16 

2.48' 

2.18 

1.89 

2.54 

2.73 

2.51 

2.71 

2.76 

2.65 

2.76 

3.19 

2.86 

2.43 

1.69 

1.98 

2.75 

2.62 


0.01809 
. 02563 
. 01851 
.02056 
. 02317 
.02209 
. 01807 
.02072 
.00953 
.02019 
.02062 
. 01895 
.01841 
. 02469 
.02004 
'.02085 
. 01945 
. 01847 

■ .01777 
.02183 
.02252 
.02287 
.01324 
.01572 
.01291 
.02048 
. 01701 
.02296 
. 01858 
.01798 
. 02028 
.01593 
. 01507 
.01931 
. 01663 
. 02395 
.01709 
. 01959 
. 01746 
.014.53 
. 01975 
.00916 
. 01666 
. 018.38 
. 01801 
. 01705 
. 02031 
. 01846 
.01968 


0. 37781 
.3.3403 
. 09798 
. 13589 
.53889 
. 46356 
. 22461 
. 30680 
. 07577 
. 19075 
. 36671 
. 43164 
. 39539 
. 45276 
.09712 
. 14362 
.32853 
. 07805 
. 18726 
.24942 
.27003 
. 14608 
. 16053 
. 16933 
.00979 
.12989 
. 30267 
. 04233 
. 30986 
. 26.553 
. 24303 
. 22705 
.06240 
. 09008 
. 10747 ■ 
.24150 
. 15679 
. 16373 
. 04164 
. 28107 
. 08792 
.10285 
. 29188 
. 22815 
. 11445 
.16626 
.01649 
. 06854 
. 39297 


0. 0004777 
.0008168 
.0006201 
.00078.55 
.0010265 
. 0012103 
. 0004404 
. 0006235 
.0002677 
. 0006401 
.0006537 
.0004984 
. 0004437 
.0005827 
. 0005850 
.0005379 
. 0004803 
.0004674 
. 0007373 
.0004627 
.0006082 
. 0006037 
. 0006447 
.0002358 
. 0003627 
.0004137 
. 0005444 
.(X)06062 
. 0005127 
.0004877 
.0006185 
. 0005034 
. 0003736 
. 0004210 
.0003142 
.0006225 
. 0004667 
.0004917 
. 0004731 
.0004010 
.000.5233 
. 0002.527 
. (XX)5S26 
. 0005257 
. 0004387 
.0002881 
.0004022 
. 0005077 
. 0005157 


21906 


21907 


....do... 


21908 


....do... 


21909 

21911 


....do... 
....do... 


21912 


....do... 


21913 

22205 

22210 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


22211 

27005 

27205 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


27206 

27207 


....do... 
....do... 


27305 

27306 

27307 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


27308 


....do... 


27505 


....do... 


27506 


....do... 


27508 


....do... 


48406 


....do... 


48407 

48408 


....do... 
....do... 


48409 


....do... 


48506 


....do... 


48507 


....do... 


48508 


....do... 


48806 


....do... 


55005 

55006 

55305 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


55306 

55307 


....do... 
....do... 


55308 


....do... 


56105 

56205 

57005 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


57006 


....do... 


57007 


....do... 


57105 

57305 

57306 

57307 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


57308 


....do..-. 


57405 

57406 

57407 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 



YIELD, ETC., AS AFFECTED BY GROWING PERIOD. 



107 



Table 31. — Yield ami nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

period — Continued. 



DATES RIPE: JULY 11 TO 15, 1903— Continued. 




Record number. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 
(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 




Average 
kerBel., 








nitrogen. 


Kernels. 


57408 


July 13 


12. 2004 


2.61 


0. 02047 


0. 31842 


0.0005343 


57506 


....do... 


2. 7616 


2.80 


.01.534 


.07733 


.0004296 


57.507 


....do... 


6. 9861 


2.85 


. 01946 


. 19905 


. 0005545 


57508 


....do... 


12. 0728 


2.21 


.03177 


. 26680 


. 0007021 


57509 


....do... 


10. 6261 


2.54 


.01739 


. 26990 


.0004417 


57606 


....do... 


3. 0790 


2.74 


. 02333 


. 0S436 


. (X)06391 


57607 


....do... 


16. 4433 


1.73 


. 02234 


. 24847 


. 0003865 


57608 


....do... 


8. 6189 


2.64 


.01968 


. 22756 


. 0005195 


58206 


....do... 


1..3961 


2.67 


.00943 


. 03728 


. 0002519 


58207 


....do... 


4. 2207 


3.09 


. 01375 


. 13042 


. 0004248 


65305 


....do... 


1. 8018 


4.92 


. 02310 


. 08865 


.0011365 


65306 


....do... 


9. 8298 


2.41 


.01807 


.23690 


. 0004355 


65.307 


....do... 


7.0051 


2.28 


.01878 


. 15971 


. 0004282 


65308 


....do... 


11.7006 


2.09 


.02008 


. 24468 


. 0004197 


94905 


July 11 


4. 4423 


2.35 


.01553 


. 10439 


. 0003650 


94906 

Average. . 


....do... 


12. 3862 


3.41 


.01808 


. 42236 


. 0006166 


July 13 


7.6611 


2.81 


. 01887 


.20820 


. 0005290 



DATES RIPE: JULY 15 TO 19, 1903. 



18906 


July 15 
do. . . 


0. 9229 

19. 3318 

12.3685 

1.8242 

4.6045 

1.5940 

2.9886 

.2062 

3. 2340 

.7081 

.9701 

1.9154 

15. 5835 
1.5452 
3. 3006 
6.0090 
1.1166 
2.0970 
7.1181 
9. 7922 
5. 3069 
9.90,34 
3. 4436 
3.5486 
5.2616 
1. 1074 
3.6926 
6. 6206 
2.38.59 
6. 0091 
8. 2366 
.8983 
3. 7820 
5.7131 
3. 8709 
9.6779 
2. 7000 
2.8816 
4. 4673 
3.2388 

10. 1363 

. 5595 

1.2117 

7. 5006 

13. 70.57 
3. 7828 

10. 5556 

6. 7664 

.7319 

11.8435 


3.48 
4.71 
2.19 
3.02 
2.87 
3.73 
2.13 
2.44 
3.58 
2.82 
3.31 
3.66 
1.34 
3.24 
2.79 
3.54 
4.65 
3.01 
2.60 
1.98 
2.83 
2. 65 
3.36 
2.81 
2.74 
2.67 
2.55 
2.72 
2.93 
4.93 
3.11 
1.66 
2.97 
2.30 
4.39 

2. .58 

3. .50 
2.99 
2.56 
2.32 
2.70 
2.67 
1.65 
2.78 
2.86 
3.10 
2.47 
2.07 
1.95 
1.80 


0. 01420 
.02390 
.02125 
.01.393 
. 01627 
. 01968 
.01916 
.01086 
.01376 
.01161 
.01276 
.01398 
.01804 
.01717 
.02001 
.01642 
.01718 
.01906 
.01784 
.02106 
.01811 
.01814 
.017.39 
.01774 
.01.525 
.02407 
.01767 
.01876 
.01491 
. 017.32 
.02168 
.01695 
.01827 
.01814 
.01690 
.01916 
. 01534 
.01592 
. 02040 
.01732 
.01916 
.02.543 
.01893 
.01866 
. 01909 
.01175 
.01923 
.01615 
.01307 
.07544 


0. 03212 
.91052 
.27086 
. 05.508 
. 13215 
.05946 
. 06,366 
. 00.503 
.11.575 
. 01997 
.0.3211 
. 07010 
. 20881 
.0.5007 
. 09208 
.21272 
.05192 
.06312 
. 18507 
. 19388 
. 1.5019 
. 26245 
. 11.570 
.09972 
.14417 
.02957 
.09416 
. 18008 
.06991 
.29625 
.25616 
.01491 
.112.33 
. 13140 
. 16993 
. 24969 
.094.50 
. 08616 
.11436 
.07514 
.27.367 
.01494 
.01999 
. 20851 
. 39199 
.11727 
. 26073 
.14007 
.01427 
.21319 


0. 0004941 
.0011283 
.0004654 
.000.3662 
. 0004670 
. 0007340 
. 0004081 
. 0002649 
.0004927 
. 0003273 
. 0004225 
.0005117 
. 0002422 
.0005563 
. 0005581 
.0005812 
. 0007988 
.00057.38 
.0004638 
.0004170 
.0005126 
.0004807 
.000.5844 
. 0004986 
.0004179 
.01X)642S 
.0004.505 
.0005102 
. 0004369 
.0008539 
.0006741 
. 0002814 
. 0005426 ■ 
. 0004171 
. 0007421 
.0004944 
. 000.5369 
. 0004760 
. 000.5220 
. 0004018 
.0005173 
.0006790 
.0003124 
. 0005187 
. 0005460 
. 000.3642 
. 0004749 
. 0003343 
.0002549 
. 0013576 


21706 


21707 


do... 


26105 

33406 


....do... 
July IS 
. .do... 


34206 


34208 


....do... 


37906 


July 15 
do. . . 


45005 


45605. .. 


. do . . . 


48405 


....do... 


48505 . . . : 


....do... 


51005 


.do..-. 


63105 


July 18 
do. . . 


63106 


66006 


....do... 


72605 


....do... 


72806 

74605 


....do... 
do 


81705 


do 


88905 


July 16 
do. . 


88906 . 


91905 

91906 


....do... 
....do... 


92205 


..do... 


92206 


....do... 


92207 

92208 


....do... 
....do... 


92305 . . . 


do . 


92306 


....do... 


92406 . 


do 


92407 


.do... 


92408 

92409 


....do... 
. do.. 


92506 

92.507... . 


....do... 
do. 


92905 

92906 


....do... 
....do... 


92907 

92908 


....do... 
....do... 


92909 

94105 


....do... 
July 15 
July 16 

....do... 


94''05 


94206 


94207 

94208 

94406 

94407 

94605 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


94606 

Average. . 


....do... 


July 16.2 


5. 13.54 


2.87 


.01869 


. 14452 


.0005222 



108 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 31. — Yield ami nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

period — Continued. 

DATES RIPE: JULY 19 TO 23, 1903. 



Record numlier. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 

(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Weiglit 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 


Kernels 


Average 
kernel. 


17409 


July 21 
July 20 
July 21 
do. . . 


14.8957 

.3885 

2. 1462 

9. 9070 

2. 4690 

.2806 

4.1516 

5.8080 

.8478 

17. 1820 

.4336 

2. 7255 

17. 2324 
3.8811 
4. 2376 
1.8276 
2. 9999 
2.0162 
2. 5601 

11.1476 

2. 2862 

8.'4605 

.3037 

3. 0228 

6. 7665 

7. 2545 

.6316 

.3161 

1.8246 

11.66.55 

12.0278 
2.6571 
6. 1989 
2. 1.571 

17.4226 

11.3.592 

23. 1471 
9. 7084 
9.3120 
4.0230 
3. 1555 
2. 0430 

28. 2136 
9. 3629 
3.4442 
9. 1522 

14. 6802 
4. .5806 
9. 0386 
9.2130 
5.4411 
.7130 
7. 5438 
4.9315 
3. 4356 
3.6006 


2.75 
4.70 
2.02 
2.77 
2.58 
3.15 
2.90 
3.45 
2.59 
2.71 
3.84 
2.60 
2.80 
3.09 
2.71 
2.61 

2. SO 
2.88 
2.91 
1.61 
2.81 
2.63 
4. 55 
2.82 
2.74 
2.59 
3.17 
1.46 
2.44 
2.38 
2.87 
3.29 
3.00 
4.21 
2.60 
2.56 
2.74 
2.16 
2.43 
1.90 

3. .59 
4.42 
2.47 
1.89 
5.59 
2.13 
3.86 
3.49 
2.27 
3.02 
4.45 
2.32 
3.43 
2.66 
3.10 
2.49 


0.01857 
. 01340 
. 01.567 
. 02282 
.02024 
. 02806 
.01837 
.01641 
.01437 
.01968 
. 01399 
.01793 
. 02390 
. 01748 
.01859 
.01792 
.01667 
.02145 
.01939 
.02194 
.01921 
.02110 
. 01598 
.01913 
.02319 
.01988 
.01373 
.01264 
.01806 
.01919 
.02.543 
. 01692 
.01635 
.01828 
.01846 
.01965 
.01999 
.01712 
.02233 
.01934 
.01814 
.01984 
.02239 
.01724 
.01832 
. 02191 
.02484 
. 02036 
. 02270 
.01869 
.01217 
.01927 
.01975 
.01312 
.01605 
. 01895 


0. 40964 
.01826 
.04335 
. 27443 
.06399 
.00884 
• . 12039 
. 20038 
. 02196 
. 46563 
.01665 
. 07086 
. 48250 
.11992 
. 11484 
.04995 
.08400 
.05807 
.074,50 
. 17948 
.06424 
. 22251 
.01382 
. 08522 
. 18.540 
. 18789 
.02002 
.00462 
.04452 
.27765 
. 34,524 
.08742 
. 18596 
.09082 
.45299 
.29079 
. 63422 
.20970 
.22628 
.07644 
.11328 
.09030 
. 69688 
. 18538 
.19253 
. 19936 
. 56666 
. 15986 
.20518 
.27823 
.24213 
.01654 
. 25873 
.13118 
. 10650 
. 08965 


0.000510S 
. 0006296 
.0003164 
. 0006181 
. 0005221 
. 0008839 
. 000.5327 
. 0005660 
. 0003722 
. 0005334 
. 000.5371 
. 0004662 
.0006692 
. 0005402 
. 000.5037 
. 0004677 
.0004667 
.0006177 
.0(10.5644 
. 0003533 
. 0005399 
. 0005.549 
.0007273 
. 0005.394 
. 0006475 
.0005148 
.00043.52 
.0001846 
.0004408 
. 0004.567 
. 0007299 
.0005568 
. 0004906 
. 0007696 
. 0004799 
. 0005031 
. 000.5464 
.0003698 
.0005426 
. 0003674 
.0006510 
. 0008767 
.0005531 
.0003414 
.0010241 
. 0004668 
. 0009588 
. 0007105 
. 0005154 
. 0005644 
.000.5417 
.0004471 
. 0006773 
. 0003332 
. 0004977 
.0004719 


17.505 


18805 

20707 


20708 


July 20 
July 21 
July 20 
.. .do... 


21211 

21306 

21308 


21710 

21711 


July 21 


22209 


....do... 


26806 . . 


July 20 
do. . . 


26807 


26808 


....do... 


26906 


July 22 
July 20 
. . .do. . . 


26907 


26909 


32606 


July 22 

July 21 

do 


33105 


33905 


33906 


....do... 


38606 


do... 


38607 


....do... 


38608 


do... 


38609 

38706 .... 


....do... 
July 20 
July 21 

'July 26' 
July 21 
July 20 

....do... 

....do... 


40405 


42206 

44607 


48106 


48305 


48306 

48706 


55007 


do . 


5.5008 


July 21 

do.. . 

July 20 


.55206 

58805 


59606 


63107 


. do . 


63505 


July 21 
July 20 
do... 


66008 


69305 


71905 


....do... 


72606 


do.. . 


72607 


....do... 


72705 


do . . 


72706 


....do... 


72707 


July 21 
July 20 
July 21 
July 20 
. do 


72708 


74507 


76206 


84905 


84906 


....do... 


8.5206 


July 21 
do 


92405 


94209 


....do... 


Average. . 




July 20.1 


6. 5399 


2.93 


.01886 


. 18064 


. 0005482 



DATES RIPE: JULY 23 TO 27, 1903. 



17305 


July 23 


3. 6302 
3.9968 
1.2275 
2. 0907 
9. 2038 
16. 9987 
1.8517 
3. 3138 
17.1115 
14. 6942 


3.03 
3.09 
3.2,5 
3.29 
2.18 
2.88 
3.09 
2.78 
2.83 
3.32 


0. 01984 
.01645 
.02012 
.01686 
.01852 
.02285 
. 01698 
.02033 
.01974 
.02157 


0.10999 
. 12350 
.03994 
. 06878 
.20065 
. 48957 
. 05722 
.09212 
.48428 
.48784 


0.0006010 
. 0005082 
. 0006540 
.0005547 
. 0004037 
.0006580 
. 0005249 
.0005652 
.0005586 
.0006999 


17306 


17308 


....do... 


17406 


....do... 


17408 


....do... 


17410 

20705 

20706 

20710 

20805 


....do... 
....do... 
.-...do... 
....do... 
....do;.. 



YIELD, ETC., AS AFFECTED BY GKOWING TERIoD. 



109 



Table 31. — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated accordtng to hnijtli of groiring 

'period — Cont inuod . 

DATES RIPP: JULY 23 TO 27, 1903— Continued. 



Record number. 



Date 
ripe. 



21307 July 

21705 July 

21708 ' do 

21709 '....do 

22206 !....do 

22208 i....do 

26905 ! July 

26908 ....do 

27507 Julv 

27509 do 

28805 do 

28806 do 

33106 do 

33107 do 

33405 do 

34205 do 

34207 do 

38506 Julv 

38605 July 

40205 do 

40305 do 

42905 do 

44505 1.... do 

44606 do 

45606 do 

45705 do 

45805 do 

46107 do 

50705 do 

50706 do 

50905 do 

55205 July 

57805 do 

57905 do 

58505 July 

58705 do 

60605 do 

62805 do 

74606 do 

74607 do 

91305 Julv 

92505 do 



Average.. July 23.2 



Yield 

(grams). 



2. 5691 
1.5420 
9. 2850 
7.7296 
2.5712 
1.9090 
6.4102 
3. 9797 
1.3746 
5.3615 
2.1851 
14.4630 

. 3089 
6. 1026 
8. 1268 
9. 1498 
13. 5556 
1.6799 
1.2124 
3. 6302 
3.6003 
1.2499 
5. 9990 
2. 5235 
4.0358 

.7532 
1.5298 
8. 3935 

.5958 

.4701 
2. 3982 

.6893 
4. 8988 
2. 4731 
7.4516 
2. 5436 

.5952 
1.3451 
9.6451 
8. 3406 
3.0940 
2. 6615 



Percent- 
age of 
protein 
nitrogen. 



3.04 
2.45 
2.33 
2.47 
3.22 
3.18 
2.76 
2.96 
3.08 
2.90 
2.91 
3.02 
2.94 
2.35 
2.03 
2.73 
2.84 
2.89 
5.85 
4.69 
3.11 
3.17 
2.94 
2.90 
1.91 
4.18 
1.84 
2.54 
3.54 
2.80 
3.30 
3.10 
2.87 
3.18 
2.95 
3.01 
1.87 
3.25 
2.30 
2.56 
3.21 
3.00 



Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 



Protein nitrogen 
(gram) in— 



Kernels. 



0.01796 
.02f;59 
. 02381 
.02141 
.01720 
.01619 
. 01966 
.02073 
.01833 
.02206 
.02512 
.02111 
.01716 
.01919 
.01930 
.01972 
. 02219 
. 01975 
. 01987 
.01871 
.02011 
.01866 
.01764 
. 02035 
. 01834 
.01712 
.01234 
.01756 
. 01986 
. 01343 
.01085 
.01723 
.01814 
.01118 
. 02730 
.01082 
.01701 
.01212 
.02079 
. 01699 
. 02242 
.01706 



0. 07810 
. 03778 
.21634 
. 19092 
. 08086 
.06071 
. 17692 
.11780 
.04234 
. 15549 
. 04o59 
. 43679 
. 00908 
. 14341 
. 16498 
. 24979 
. 38505 
. 04855 
. 07093 
.17026 
.11197 
.03650 
.17637 
.07318 
. 07708 
.03148 
.02815 
.21319 
.02109 
.01316 
.07914 
.02137 
. 14060 
.07859 
. 21982 
. 07656 
.01113 
.04272 
.22184 
.21352 
.09932 
.07985 



Average 
kernel. 



0.0005461 
.0006514 
. 0005547 
. 0005289 
. 0005538 
. 0005144 
. 0005427 
. 0006135 
. 0005646 
. 0006399 
. 0007309 
. 0006376 
. 0005045 
. 0004510 
.0003919 
.0005383 
.0006273 
.0005712 
.0011627 
. 0008776 
. 0006255 
. 0005447 
. 0005187 
. 0005902 
. 0003504 
. 0007155 
. 0002700 
. 0004460 
. 0007032 
. 0003761 
. 0003581 
. 0005342 
. 0005207 
. 0003556 
. 00080.52 
. 0003258 
.0003180 
. 0003938 
. 0004781 
. 0004349 
. 0007197 
.0005118 



4.9015 



2.93 



.01878 



.13654 ! .0005544 



DATES RIPE: JULY 27. 1903, OR LATER. 



17307 


July 27 


3. 1454 


3.46 


0. 02279 


0. 10SS3 


0. 0007886 


17405 


....do... 


15. 6996 


2.13 


.02127 


. 33441 


. 0004531 


17506 


....do... 


2. 2881 


3. 52 


. 02460 


. 0^044 


. 0008660 


17507 


....do... 


.7720 


3. 80 


.01795 


. 02934 


. 0006822 


18905 


....do... 


1.4864 


3. SI 


.01443 


. 05663 


. 0005498 


20709 


....do... 


5.3229 


3.05 


. 02063 


. 16235 


. 0006292 


21205 


....do... 


2. 3642 


3.16 


. 01922 


.07471 


. 0006074 


21206 


....do... 


2. 8564 


5.23 


.01917 


.14939 


. 0010026 


21207 


....do... 


2. 3066 


2.96 


. 01955 


. 06S04 


. 0005766 


21208 


....do... 


5. 1594 


3.24 


. 01798 


.16712 


. 0005824 


21209 


....do... 


1. 4484 


3.61 


. 01627 


. 05228 


. 0005875 


21210 


....do... 


3. 9143 


5. 03 


.01577 


. 19689 


. 0007934 


21212 


....do... 


1.7216 


2.16 


. 02049 


.03718 


. 0004427 


21305 


....do... 


6,2514 


2.67 


. 020037 


. 16691 


. 0005350 


22207 


....do... 


3. 2787 


2. 77 


. 01940 


. 09082 


. 0005374 


25205 


....do... 


10. 7836 


2.71 


.02066 


. 28560 


. 0005599 


25206 


....do... 


4. 6754 


2.76 


. 02281 


. 12904 


.0006295 


26106 


....do... 


2. 0737 


2.63 


. 02304 


.05454 


. 0006060 


26107 


....do... 


2, 0390 


3.92 


.01416 


. 07993 


. 0005551 


26805 


....do... 


4. 9456 


2.81 


. 02248 


. 13897 


. 0006317 


28206 


....do... 


4. 3698 


3.07 


.01996 


. 13415 


. 0006126 


32206 


....do... 


10. 4036 


1.81 


. 02052 


. 18831 


.0003714 


32207 : 


....do... 


1. 2573 


3.48 


.01822 


. 04375 


. 0006341 


32605 


....do... 


5.2268 


1.20 


. 02323 


.06272 


. 0002788 



110 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



T.\BLE 31. — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

period — Continued. 

DATES RIPE: JULY 27, 1903, OR LATER— Continued. 



Record number. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 
(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


32608 


July 27 
do. . . 


1.0183 
3. 1346 
7.0889 
1. 11.32 
7.0596 
8. 1890 

2. 8903 
4. 1281 
6. 1962 
5.0200 
6. 1394 
8.0905 
1. 2069 

3. .3004 
.9452 

2.5134 
12. 1088 
21. 5399 
9. 3541 
1.9218 
1.8862 
4.6383 
4. 1546 
1. 8494 
1. 4S92 
2.8000 
1. 4464 
1.1271 
4.6146 
1.6103 

4. .3615 
1.2716 

.6760 
1.7280 

3. 7407 
1.9469 
2. 3031 
7. 1828 
2. 3986 
7.6690 

13. 5696 
2.4420 

12. 01.36 
8. 4415 
8. 2929 
2. 6462 
.5572 

14. 2986 

4. 4222 
.4096 
.8172 

8. 4407 
15. 7835 
4. 5737 
1.2.391 
8. 7448 
3. 4766 
3. 0282 
7. 6241 


3.78 
.3.41 
1.62 
1..39 
2.39 
2.21 
3.22 
4. .33 
3.12 
3.88 
2.96 
2.64 
2. .34 
2.93 
2.53 
2.84 
3.61 
2.11 
2.88 
2.93 
3.02 
2. .37 
2.82 
3. 63 
3.07 
2.92 
4.13 

2. 86 
.3.00 
2.54 
3. 13 
3.24 
3.62 

3. ,57 
3.11 
1.88 
2.43 
2.12 
2.44 
2.63 

2. .50 
5.82 
1.66 

3. .36 
2.95 
2.48 
2.39 
2.92 
1.98 
2.73 
2.60 
2.35 
1.81 
2.62 
,3. 31 
2.48 
2.60 
2.-56 
2.63 


0.01851 
.02090 
.02271 
.01446 
.02345 
. 02144 
.02125 
. 01994 
. 02213 
. 01880 
. 01987 
. 01972 
. 02155 
.01710 
. 02555 
. 01808 
.02252 
. 02089 
.02093 
. 02869 
.01699 
. 01341 
.02444 
. 01967 
. 02251 
. 02258 
. 015,55 
. 02049 
.01775 
. 01964 
. 01652 
.01898 
. 02939 
.01516 
.01732 
.02049 
. 01355 
.01880 
. 01568 
.02073 
. 02047 
.02220 
.02153 
. 0.3963 
. 01929 
. 01,585 
.02229 
. 02291 
. 02047 
.01781 
. 01434 
. 01695 
.02165 
. 01862 
.01721 
. 02043 
.01625 
.01495 
.01749 


0. 03849 
.10689 
. 11223 
. 01547 
. 16872 
. 18098 
■ .09307 
. 17875 
. 19.332 
. 19478 
. 18173 
. 2.3998 
.02824 
. 09670 
.02391 
. 07138 
.43713 
. 45435 
.21399 
. 05631 
.05696 
. 10967 
.11716 
. 06713 
. 04572 
.08176 
. 05974 
. 03223 
. 13843 
.04090 
. 13652 
. 04120 
. 02436 
. 06169 
.11636 
. 03660 
. 05596 
. 15228 
. 05853 
.20170 
. 33923 
. 14213 
. 19943 
. 28363 
. 24464 
.06563 
. 01332 
. 417.52 
. 08756 
.01118 
. 02125 
. 19836 
. 28569 
.11710 
.04101 
.21687 
. 09039 
.07964 
.20052 


0.0006998 
.0007126 
. 00(13679 
. 0002009 
. a)05605 
. 00047.38 
.0006843 
. 0008635 
.0006904 
.0007295 
. 0005881 
. 000.5327 
. 0005053 
. 0005010 
. 0006433 
. 0005135 
. 0007764 
. 0004407 
. 0006027 
. 0008404 
. 0005132 
.0003177 
. 0006892 
.0007142 
. 0006927 
. 0006594 
. 0006423 
.0005861 
. 0005324 
. 0004988 
.0()0.')I71 
.00(16149 
.0010640 
.000.5411 
. 000.5386 
. 0003853 
.0003292 
. 0003986 
. 0003825 
.0005451 
.0005117 
.0012921 
. 0003574 
. 0013316 
. 0005689 
. 0003930 
. 0005327 
. 0006539 
. 0004054 
. 0004S62 
. 0003728 
. 00039.S2 
.0003910 
.0004870 
. 0aj56!l7 
. 000.5067 
. 0004224 
. 0003923 
. 0004.599 


33305 


3.3407 

33408 


....do... 
....do... 


.33605 

33606 


....do... 
....do... 


,3.3607 

34405 


....do... 
....do... 


.34606 

.36905 


....do... 
....do... 


.37.305 

37705 


....do... 
....do... 


,37706 


....do... 


37707 


....do... 


.37905 


Aug. 4 
July 27 
do. . . 


38005.. 


38505 


39205 


do.. 


39405 


....do... 


39506 


Aug. 4 
July 27 
do. . . 


39507 


.39606 


40505 . . 


do... 


42205 

42405 


....do... 
do 


4.3405 

43505 


....do... 
Aug. 4 
July 27 


44605 


46105 


46106. .. 


. . do . . . 


48705 


....do... 


49505 


do... 


49905 ' 


do 


.50906 1 

55508 

58806 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


58905 

59605 


....do... 
do 


63506 

66005.. 

69506 

69805 

69806 

72405 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
.. do... 


72406 

72905 

7.3307 

73308 

74305 

74506 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


74508 

76205 -..1 


....do... 
....do... 


80305 

81405 

81406 

84405 

85205 

86105 

86106 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
do... 


Average. . 




July 27.2 


4.6636 


2.94 


.01992 


.12854 


.0005800 



RELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 



Ill 



Table 32. — Summary of yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of 

growing period. 



Plants grouped according to 
date ripe. 



Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 



Average 
date ripe. 



Yield 

(grams). 



Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen. 



Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 



Kernels. 



Average 
kernel. 



July 7 to 11 

July 11 to 15... 
July 15 to 19... 
July 19 to 23... 
July 23 to 27... 
July 27, or later 



July 8. 9.. 
July 13. . . 
July 16.2. 
July 20. 1. 
July 23. 2. 
July 27. 2. 



9.9067 
7.6611 
5. 1354 
6. 5399 
4.9015 
4.6636 



2.69 
2.81 
2.87 
2.93 
2.93 
2.94 



0.02024 

.01887 
.01869 
.01886 
.01878 
.01992 



0. 26475 
. 20820 
. 14452 
.18064 
. 13654 
.12854 



0. 0005356 
. 0005290 
.0005222 
.000.5482 
.000.5544 
.0005800 



Table 33. — Summary of nitrogen content, etc., tabulated according to yield per plant. 



Plants grouped according to 


Num- 
ber of 


Average 
date ripe. 


Yield 

(grams). 


Percent-' Weight 

age of age 
proteid 1 ^^«_°.i 
nitrogen.! ^^^^_ 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


yield (in grams). 


anal- 
yses. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Below 1 


31 

67 
88 
94 
52 

20 
4 


July 20. 2.. 
July 21. 9.. 
July 20.... 
July 18. 3.. 
July 15. 1.. 
July 15. 1.. 
July 14. 5.. 


0. 6049 
1.7673 
3.5683 
7. 6706 
12.2,573 
17. 1908 
23. 7186 


2.91 0.01683 
3.09 ! .018.52 
3.03 1 .01796 
2.68 i .01997 
2.71 1 .02168 

2.54 1 .02103 

2.55 I .02159 


0.01731 
.0.5456 
. 10794 
. 20270 
.33433 
. 43921 
. 60401 


0. 0004916 


1 to 2 5 


.0005730 


2.5 to 5 


. 0005445 


5 to 10 


.0005351 


10 to 15 


. 0005774 


15 to 20 


. 0005382 




.000.5450 







Table 34. — Summary of yield, etc., tabulated according to nitrogen content. 



Plants grouped according to 


Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 


Average 
date ripe. 


Yield 
(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram) . 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


percentage of nitrogen. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Below 1.5 


4 

25 
18 
47 
82 
67 
47 
20 
23 
25 


Julv22.5.. 
July 18. 5.. 
July 19. 8.. 
July 17. 3.. 
July 16. 3.. 
July 19.6.. 
July 21. 2.. 
July 20. 7.. 
July 21. 5.. 
July 19. 5.. 


5.8099 
2. 7423 
8.9542 
7.3389 
8.0817 
5.9093 
4.4497 
4.6756 
3. 6486 
4.5431 


1.35 
1.80 
2.12 
2.39 
2.63 
2.85 
3.11 
3.37 
3.68 
4.72 


0.01709 
.02124 
.02030 
.02000 
.01938 
.01910 
.01824 
.01870 
.01852 
.01819 


0.07290 
.11620 
. 19070 
. 18478 
. 21280 
. 16609 
.13847 
. 15189 
. 13513 
. 21239 


0. 0002266 


1.5 to 2 ... . 


. 0003867 


2 to 2.25 


.0004325 


2.25 to 2.5 


.0004773 


2 5 to 2 75 


. 0005102 


2.75 to 3 


.000.5454 


3 to 3.25 


.0005667 


3.25 to 3.5 


.0006213 


3.5 to 4 


.0006807 


More than 4 


.0008639 









RELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, HEIGHT, AND 
TILLERING OF PLANT. 

The size of the head has alw^ays been considered to be closely con- 
nected with the productiveness of wheat. The well-known work of 
Hallet in increasing the yielding qualities of wheat is perhaps the 
best example of wheat improvement by the selection of plants having 
large heads. Whether large heads or a large number of medium- 
sized heads on a plant are more desirable is still a question. 

Table 35 gives the yields, etc., of between 300 and 400 plants, tab- 
ulated according to the number of kernels on the head. Table 36 
is a summary of these, while Tables 37 and 38 consist of the same 
data tabulated according to the yield per plant and yield per head, 
respectively. 



112 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



It will ])e seen from Table 36 that the heads of slightly more than 
medium size produced the largest yields of grain; that the weight of 
the average kernel did not increase with the size of the head, nor did 
it decrease except on the very largest heads; that the plants with 
somewhat more than average-sized heads were the tallest, and that 
the plants with medium-sized heads or slightly less tillered most 
largely. 

Table 37 shows that with an increased yield per plant there is a 
constant increase in the height and tillering of the plant. 

Table 38 indicates that the yield per head and yield per plant do 
not increase together, but that the largest yielding plants are those of 
medium yield per head. The same would seem to be true of the 
height and tillering of the plant. The weight of the average kernel 
increases quite uniformly with the yield per head. 

In considering these results it must be borne in mind that these 
plants w^ere grow^n 6 inches apart each way, and w^ere therefore not 
under the conditions that would obtain in a thickly drilled or broad- 
casted field, where lack of ability to tiller w^ould be compensated for 
b}^ the larger number of plants. How^ever, the variety of wheat 
yielding best in Nebraska is one having only a medium-sized or 
even small head, as compared with most wheats, but it is a strong- 
tillering variety. 

Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant. 
SIZE OF HEAD, BELOW 16 KERNELS. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Size ol 
head. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Yield per 
head 

(grams). 


Weight of 

average 

kernel 

(grams). 


Height 
(em.). 


Tillering. 


17308 


15.2 


1. 2275 


0.3069 


0.02012 


59 


5 


17406 


15.5 


2.0907 


.2613 


.01686 


65 


11 


18805 


15.2 


2. 1462 


.2385 


.01567 


65 


18 


20708 


13.6 


2.4690 


.2743 


. 02024 


60 


11 


21211 :.. 


10.0 


.2806 


.2806 


.02806 


45 


2 


22209 


15.5 


.4336 


.2168 


. 01399 


70 


6 


26805 


15.7 


4.9456 


.3533 


. 02248 


68 


26 


32207 


13.8 


1.2573 


.2515 


.01822 


47 


5 


37905 


12.3 


.9452 


.3151 


.02555 


52 


3 


39506 ;.. 


11.2 


1.9218 


.3203 


.02869 


48 


6 


42206 


12.5 


.3161 


.1580 


.01264 


63 


5 


44607 


12.6 


2.5235 


.2281 


.02035 


52 


12 


48408 


13.5 


.3485 


.1742 


.01291 


45 


3 


49905 


11.5 


.6760 


.3380 


.02939 


49 


2 


50705 


15.0 


.5958 


.2979 


.01986 


40 


3 


73307 


12.5 


.5572 


.2786 


.02229 


46 


4 


74506 


12.5 


.4096 


.2048 


.01781 


68 


2 


94105 


11.0 


.5595 


.2797 


.02543 


51 


1 


Average . . 


13.3 


1.3169 


.2654 


.02059 


55.2 


6.9 





SIZE 


OF HEAD, 16 TO 20 KERNELS 






17410 


19.1 


16.9987 


0. 4358 


0. 02285 


84 


46 


21205 


17.6 


2. 3642 


.3378 


. 01922 


55 


10 


21305 


16.4 


6.2514 


.3290 


.02004 


65 


21 


21307 


17.9 


2. 5691 


.3211 


.01796 


53 


10 


21705 


19.3 


1.5420 


.5140 


. 02659 


73 


3 


21710 


19.7 


.8478 


.2826 


.01437 


59 


5 



KELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 



113 



Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 16 TO 20 KERNELS— Continued. 



Record num- 
l.er. 


Size of 
head. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams) . 


v,„i/i „„_ Weight of 
(grams). (grams). 


21807 

22207 

22208 

26906 

26909 

28206 

33106 

37706 

37906 

38005 

38607 

38608 

38609 

42205 

44605 

44606 

48405 

50706 

55905 

55906 

56105 

56207 

57307 

69705 

74508 

81708 

88608 

92207 

92505 

95510 


18.8 
18.8 
16.8 
19.0 
18.0 
19.9 
18.0 
18.7 
19.0 
19.8 
19.0 
17.6 
19.5 
18.8 
18.3 
17.7 
19.0 
17.5 
18.4 
19.2 
17.7 
17.7 
16.3 
17.4 
19.0 
19.1 
18.5 
19.0 
17.3 
19.9 


9.4172 
3.2787 
1.9090 
4.2376 
2.9999 
4.3698 

.3089 
1.2069 

.2063 
2. 5134 

.3037 
3.0228 
6. 7665 
1.8494 
1. 1271 
2.5235 

. 9701 . 

.4701 
5. 7948 
7.9968 
5. 7431 
10.9073 
4.7117 
3. 7810 

.8172 
7. 3993 
1 . 5355 
3.6926 
2.6615 
2.8356 


0.4709 0.02498 77 25 
.3643 .01940 65 16 
.2727 1 .01619 .57 i 8 
.3531 1 .01859 70 16 
.3000 .01667 .50 : 10 
.3972 : .01996 | 80 26 
.3089 .01716 1 43 ' 2 
.4023 .02155 42 4 
.2063 .01086 50 2 
.3591 .01808 .53 7 
.3037 .01598 56 , 2 
.3359 .01913 60 1 11 
.4511 .02309 65 1 6 
.1699 1 .01967 68 6 
.3757 ' .02049 .53 3 
.3605 .02035 52 8 
.2425 .01276 i 55 5 
.23.50 .01343 \ 38 2 
.3219 .01751 75 34 
.3076 .01603 85 1 40 
.3023 .01709 70 35 
.4195 .02361 ! 84 42 
.2945 .01801 1 67 17 
.2701 .01550 1 88 28 
.2724 .01434 50 4 
.4933 1 .02578 86 20 
.38.39 .02075 69 4 
.3357 .01767 73 15 
.2957 .01706 68 12 
.3544 .01783 70 8 


Average . . 


18.4 j 3.7758 .3383 i .01862 64.1 13.7 



17305. 
17408. 
17507. 
20705. 
20706. 
20707. 
20709. 
21207. 
21212. 
21306. 
21707. 
21708. 
21809. 
21811. 
21812. 
21907. 
22205. 
26106. 
26806. 
26807. 
27207. 
27307. 
27505. 
28805. 
33105. 
33405. 
33407. 
33906. 
38606. 
38706. 
40405. 
43505. 
45605. 
45705. 
48106. 
48305. 
48406. 
48507. 



SIZE OF HEAD, 20 TO 24 KERNELS. 



22.9 
23.7 
21.5 
21.8 
23.3 
21.1 
23.5 
23.6 
21.0 
22.6 
23.3 
20.5 
20.9 
21.0 
22.9 
22.6 
23.6 
22.5 
21.7 
21.8 
20.7 
23.8 
21.6 
21.7 
22.0 
23.4 
21.8 
23.8 
22.3 
21.5 
23.0 
23.2 
20.3 
22.0 
21.0 
23.6 
22.6 
23.3 



3. 6302 
9. 203S 
.7720 
1.8517 
3.3138 
9.9070 
5.3229 
2. 3066 
1.7216 
4.1516 

12.3685 
9.2850 
8. 0214 

11.9114 

14.8139 
2.9248 
2. 6965 
2.0737 
2. 7255 

17. 2324 
3. 3266 
3.08,50 

12.0399 

2. 1851 

2.5601 

8.1268 

7.0889 

2.2862 

8. 4605 

7.2545 

.6316 

1.4464 

.7081 

.7532 

11.6655 

12.0278 
3.2964 
1.6036 



0. 4538 
.4383 
.3860 
. 3703 
.4734 
.4718 
.4839 
.4613 
.4304 
.4152 
.4947 
.4887 
.4011 
.4412 
.3445 
.4178 
.2247 
.5184 
.3894 
.5222 
.4158 
.4407 
.4815 
..5463 
. 4267 
.4515 
.5063 
.4572 
.4700 
.4267 
.3158 
.3616 
.2360 
.3766 
.4023 
.6014 
.2997 
.5345 



0. 01984 
. 01852 
.01795 
. 01698 
.02033 
. 02282 
. 02063 
. 01955 
. 02049 
.01837 
.02125 
. 02381 
.01919 
. 02101 
. 01507 
.01851 
.00953 
.02304 
.01793 
.02390 
.02004 
.01847 
.02183 
. 02512 
.01939 
.01930 
.02271 
.01921 
.02110 
.01988 
.01373 
. 01555 
.01161 
.01712 
.01919 
.02543 
.01324 
.02296 



75 


22 


67 


13 


60 


6 


.50 


5 


60 


11 


90 


24 


85 


26 


84 


25 


87 


29 


90 


54 


82 


8 


SO 


54 


60 


9 


56 


12 


76 


40 


75 


9 


SO 


10 


84 


38 


65 


6 


65 


12 


68 


20 


67 


18 


67 


9 


71 


24 


75 


30 


.54 


3 


45 


3 


.55 


6 


.58 


6 


79 


39 


81 


28 


68 


13 



27889— No. 78—05- 



114 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 20 TO 24 KERNELS— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 



48806. 
5.5205. 
5560fi. 
55907. 
55908. 
5.5909. 
56205. 
56206. 
56208. 
56209. 
57005. 
57105. 
57305. 
57306. 
57308. 
57503. 
57507. 
57508. 
63105. 
63106. 
63107. 
72605. 
72705. 
74305. 
74507. 
74605. 
74606. 
76205. 
81405. 
81705. 
81706. 
81707. 
81709. 
84405. 
88607. 
91905. 
9190o. 
92206. 
92305. 
92306. 
92506. 
92507. 



Size of 
head. 



Average. 



21.0 
20.0 
22.9 
21.4 
23.4 
21.5 
23.8 
20.4 
22.5 
21.1 
22.0 
23.9 
22.8 
21.7 
21.4 
22.5 
23.9 
22.3 
22.5 
23.6 
21.9 
21.7 
21.9 
21.6 
20.5 
21.0 
23.2 
21.7 
21.8 
21.1 
21.2 
23.8 
20.5 
23.8 
23.4 
22.0 
22.2 
23.0 
22.9 
23.1 
22.9 
22.0 



Yield per : Yield per 

plant liead 

(grams), j (grams). 



9. 8346 

.6893 

11.0930 

19. S966 

12.2210 

9.2120 

fi. 5232 

9.' 3093 

13. 5720 

15. 8080 

1.5364 

3. 7263 

8.5777 

7.9772 

9. 8378 

2.7616 

6.9861 

12.0728 

1.5452 

3.3006 

9.3120 

1.1166 

9. 1522 

4.4222 

9. 2130 

7.1181 

9. 6451 

8.4407 

4. 5737 

9. 7922 

15.3928 

18.3614 

16.4692 

8.7448 

5.1584 

3.4436 

3. 5486 

1. 1074 

2. 3859 

6.0091 

3.8709 

9. 6779 



22.2 



6.8466 



0.3782 
.3446 
.5042 
.5542 
.5092 
.6580 
.4659 
.3724 
.5429 
.3513 
.3841 
.2192 
.3899 
.3989 
.3t44 
.3452 
.4657 
.7102 
.3883 
.4715 
.4901 
.3722 
.5384 
.4422 
.3839 
.3746 
.4822 
.3670 
.4158 
.4451 
.4527 
.5564 
.4451 
.4858 
.5158 
.3826 
.3943 
.5537 
.3408 
.4006 
.3871 



Weight of 

average 

kernel 

(grams). 



0.01798 
.01723 
. 02205 
.02590 
.02175 
.03050 
.01959 
. 01829 
. 02356 
. 01664 
. 01746 
.00916 
. 01666 
.01838 
.01705 
.01534 
.01946 
.03177 
.01717 
.02001 
.02233 
.01718 
.02191 

■.02047 
. 01869 
.01784 
. 02079 
.01695 
.01862 
.02106 
.02132 
.02336 
. 02175 
.02043 
. 02205 
.01739 
.01774 
. 02407 
.01491 
.01732 
.01690 
.01916 



Height 

(cm.). 



. 4355 



.01953 



Tillering. 



SIZE OF HEAD, 24 TO 28 KERNELS. 



1730^ 


24.3 


3.99^8 


0. 3997 


0. 01645 


66 


12 


17405 


25.1 


15. 6996 


.5414 


.02127 


72 


34 


17409 


24.3 


14. 8957 


.4514 


.01857 


85 


39 


20710 


25.5 


17.1115 


.5032 


. 01974 


77 


39 


21206 


24.8 


2. 8564 


.4761 


.01917 


62 


6 


21308 


25.3 


5.8080 


.4149 


.01641 


54 


14 


21706 


26.9 


19.3318 


.6444 


.02390 


88 


38 


21709 


25.8 


7. 7296 


..5521 


.02141 


85 


23 


21711 


24.2 


17. 1820 


.4773 


.01968 


85 


51 


21S06 


24.9 


14.2450 


.5935 


.02378 


91 


32 


21808 


25.7 


19.7446 


.4388 


.01708 


96 


57 


21810 


26.0 


1.0304 


.5152 


.01982 


55 


4 


21913 


27.3 


10. 1925 


.5662 


. 02072 


84 


27 


22210 


27.1 


6.0173 


.5470 


. 02019 


78 


31 


26808 


24.7 


3.8811 


.4312 


.01748 


64 


11 


20905 


25.1 


6.4102 


.4931 


.01966 


66 


15 


26908 


24.0 


3.9797 


.4974 


.02073 


62 


9 


27205 


26.2 


16.4061 


.4825 


.01841 


87 


57 


27305 


24.3 


5. 5666 


.5061 


. 02085 


80 


22 


27506 


24.7 


10.0005 


.5556 


. 02252 


85 


23 


27507 


25.0 


1.3746 


.4582 


.01833 


50 


- 4 


27508 


27.9 


5. .5324 


.6137 


.02287 


78 


19 


32608 


27.5 


1.0183 


.5091 


.01851 


50 


2 


33107 


24.5 


6. 1026 


.4694 


.01919 


73 


29 


33305 


25.0 


3. 1346 


.5224 


.02090 


53 


/ 


33403 


25.7 


4.6045 


.4186 


. 01627 


72 


16 


33408 


25.7 


1.1132 


.3711 


.01446 


56 


4 



RELATION OF SIZE OK HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 



115 



Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, heir/ht, and iilUrinff of jilant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 24 TO 28 KERNELS— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 



33605. 
33606. 
33607. 
33905. 
34207. 
37705. 
39507 . 
45606 . 
48306. 
48407 . 
4&109. 
48505 . 
48508. 
55506 . 
56107 . 
57509 . 
5760;i. 
57607 . 
57608. 
58206. 
63506. 
65305. 
65306. 
65308. 
66008. 
69505. 
69805 . 
69806. 
72606 . 
72607. 
72905. 
74607. 
80305. 
81406. 
81710. 
84906. 
85205. 
86105. 
86106 . 
88606. 
88609. 



92205. 
92405. 
92407 . 
92907. 
94206 . 
94208. 
94407. 
94907 . 
9490S. 
94909 . 
95506 . 
95507. 
95508. 
95705. 
95707. 



Average . 



Size of 
head. 



Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 



Yield per 

head 
(grams). 



27.4 
27.3 
27.2 
26.7 
26.6 
25.6 
27.8 
24.4- 
26.2 
26.6 
26.2 
27.4 
27.4 
27.1 
24.9 
27.8 
26.4 
27.3 
24.3 
24.7 
25.5 
26.0 
25.9 
26.5 
24.9 
25.5 
27.5 
27.9 
27.1 
26.9 
27.8 
25.8 
25.1 
24.0 
24.7 
25.5 
26.7 
25.4 
27.2 
25.3 
24.7 
26.6 
26.5 
26.7 
26.5 
24.3 
25.1 
24.8 
26.2 
27.2 
25.0 
24.2 
25.9 
26.0 
25.5 
26.5 
26.0 



25.9 



7. 0596 

8. 1890 

2. S903 

11.1476 

13. 5.556 

8.0905 

1.8862 

4.0358 

2.6571 

11.2890 

6. 4302 

1.9154 

11.2(X)8 

17.S.506 

14, 4:).5(; 

10.6261 
3.0790 

16. 4433 
8.6189 
1.3961 
2.3986 
1.8018 
9.8298 

11.7066 
3. 1555 
4.7116 
2.4420 

12.0136 
9.3629 
3.4442 
2. 6462 
8.3406 

15. 7835 
1.2391 
9.1411 
7.5438 
3.4766 
3.0282 
7.6241 
9.9456 
9. 8719 
5.3069 
5.2616 
3.4356 
.8983 
4.4673 
7.5006 
3. 7828 
6. 7664 

12. 1918 
2.3678 
3. 6977 

11.0548 

12. 1592 

14.4617 

10.3426 
.7577 



Weight of 

average 

Icemel 

(grams). 



0.6418 
.5489 
.5781 
.5867 
.5894 
.4495 
.4715 
.4484 
.4428 
.4181 
.5358 
.3831 
..5091 
. .5578 
.3023 
. 48:30 
.6158 
.6090 
.4788 
.2327 
.3998 
. 6006 
. 4681 
..5321 
. 4.505 
.4712 
.6105 
.6007 
.4681 
.4920 
.4410 
.4390 
.5442 
.4130 
..5713 
..5029 
.4386 
.3785 
.4765 
.5234 
.5196 
.4824 
.4047 
.4294 
.4491 
.4964 
.4688 
.2909 
.4229 
.5301 
.4736 
.2631 
.4806 
.5527 
.4987 
.4309 
.3788 



0.02345 
.02144 
.02125 
.02194 
.02219 
.01972 
.01699 
.01834 
.01692 
.01572 
.02048 
.01398 
.018.58 
. 02062 
.01(58 
.01739 
. 02383 
.02234 
. 01968 

-.00943 
.01568 
.02310 
.01807 
. U2(J0S 
.01814 
.01847 
.02220 
.02153 
.01724 
.01832 
.01585 
.01699 
.02165 
.01721 
.02308 
.01975 
.01625 
.01495 
.01749 
.02068 
.02100 
.01811 
.01525 
.01605 
.01695 
.02040 
.01866 
.01175 
.01615 
.01948 
. 01894 
.01(,9o 
.01852 
.02029 
.01954 
.01626 
.01457 



Height 
(cm.). 



Tillering 



7.5207 



.4848 



.01874 



73.8 



SIZE OF HEAD, 28 TO 32 KERNELS. 



17505 

17506 

20805 

21208 

21209 

21210 

21805 

21905 

21906 

21908 

21909 

21911 


29.0 
31.0 
31.7 
28.7 
29.7 
29.6 
29.3 
28.2 
31.4 
28.8 
30.9 
29.5 


0.3885 

2.2881 

14.6942 

5. 1594 

1.4484 

3.9143 

20.9290 

14.3111 

10.4800 

3.5574 

12.1819 

8.4593 


0.3885 
.7627 
.6679 
.51.59 
.4828 
.4893 
.4983 
.5111 
.8062 
.5929 
.7166 
.6597 


0.01340 
.02460 
. 02157 
.01798 
. 01627 
.01.577 
.01699 
.01809 
.02.563 
.020.56 
.02317 
.02209 


46 
55 
85 
63 
51 
59 
91 
92 
88 
92 
86 
90 


7 

6 
30 
11 

6 

8 
48 ■ 
62 
27 

9 
29 
23 



116 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 35. — Relation of size of Tiead to yield, height, and tillering of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OP HEAD, 28 TO 32 KERNELS— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 



22206 

22211 

26107 

27005 

27206 

27306 

27308 

27509 

32206 

32605 

32606 

34205 

34208 

37305 

38505 

38506 

38605 

39405 

39606 

40305 

44505 

45005 

4.5805 

46107 

50905 

50906 

55005... 

55006 

55007 

55206 

55306 

.55307 

55507 

56106 

57006 

57407 

58207 

58.505 

58806 

59606 

63505 

65307 

66005 

69506 

71905 

72406 

72706 

72707 

76206 

88906 

924QS 

92908 

94205 

94207 

94209 

94406 

94605 

94606 

94905 

94906 

95706 

Averasre. 



Size of 
head. 



29.2 
28.0 
28.8 
28.9 
28.8 
28.5 
31.7 
30.4 
28.2 
28.1 
31.3 
30.9 
31.2 
30.9 
29.6 
28.3 
30.5 
31.9 
31.4 
29.8 
30.9 
29.4 
31.0 
31.9 
31.6 
28.5 
30.2 
.30.1 
29.5 
30.4 
30.6 
31.1 
31.5 
28.0 
.30.5 
31.8 
30.7 
31.1 
31.7 
29.8 
29.7 
31.1 
30.8 
.30.1 
29.3 
30.7 
29.5 
28.1 
29.8 
30.3 
29.6 
31.2 
31.3 
29.9 
31.7 
28.9 
28.0 
29.9 
31.8 
29.8 
29.7 

30.1 



Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 



2. 5712 

11.5675 

2.0390 

16. 4120 

19. 1854 

13.3011 

4. 5123 

5.3615 

10. 4036 

5. 2268 

2.0162 

9. 1498 

2. 9886 

6. 1394 

12. 1088 

1.6799 

1.2124 

9.3.541 

4.6383 

3. 6003 

5.9990 

3.2340 

1.5298 

S. 3935 

2. 3982 

1.7280 

7.9684 

7. 1852 

2. 1571 

11.3.592 

4.1323 

5.6864 

9.8228 

12.0161 

10. 1836 

14. 9992 

4. 2207 

7.4516 

1.9469 

9. 7084 

4.0230 

7.0051 

7. 6690 

13. 5696 

28. 2136 

8.2929 

14. 6802 

4.5806 

5.4411 

9.9034 

3. 7820 

3.2388 

1.2117 

13.7057 

3.6006 

10. 5556 

.7319 

11.8435 

4. 4423 

12. 3862 

5. 1629 

7.4992 



Yield per 

head 
(grams) . 



0.5142 
.5784 
.4078 
.5471 
.7106 
.5^2 
.5640 
.6702 
.5779 
.6533 
.6721 
.6100 
..5977 
.6139 
.6373 
.5600 
.6062 
. 6681 
.4217 
.6000 
.5453 
.4042 
.3824 
.5.595 
.3426 
.4320 
.6129 
.4790 
.5393 
.5978 
.5903 
.5169 
.6139 
.5224 
.4427 
.6250 
.4221 
.6210 
.6489 
.5109 
.5747 
.5838 
.6391 
.6168 
. 6561 
.5923 
.7340 
.5726 
.3627 
. 5502 
.5403 
. 5398 
.4039 
.5711 
.6001 
. 5556 
.3659 
. 5383 
.4936 
.5385 
.5736 

.5598 



Weight of 

average 

kernel 

(grams). 



0. 01720 
. 02062 
.01416 
.01895 
.02469 
.01945 
.01777 
. 02206 
. 02052 
. 02323 
. 02145 
.01972 
.01916 
. 01987 
. 02252 
. 01975 
. 01987 
.02093 
.01341 
.02011 
.01764 
.01376 
. 01234 
.017,56 
.01085 
.01516 
.02028 
.01593 
. 01828 
. 01965 
. 01931 
.01663 
.01949 
.01866 
. 01453 
.01968 
.01375 
. 02730 
.02049 
.01712 
.01934 
. 01878 
. 02073 
. 02047 
. 02239 
.01929 
. 024S4 
. 02036 
.01217 
.01814 
. 01827 
. 01732 
.01893 
.01909 
.01895 
.01923 
.01307 
. 07544 
. 01553 
. 01808 
. 01934 

.01958 



Height 
(em.). 



Tillering. 



EELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 



117 



Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 32 TO 36 KERNELS. 



Record num- 
ber. 



Size of 
head. 



Yield per 

plant 
(grams) . 



Yield per 

head 
(grams). 



Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(grams) . 



Height 
(cm.). 



Tillering. 



17307 34.5 

1890.5 34.3 

2iU05 32.7 

2n9(i7 34.0 

2S806 34.2 

34405 34.5 

34606 35.0 

36905 33.4 

39205 32.2 

42405 33.0 

42905 33. 5 

48506 32.7 

49.505 33.5 

51005 i 34.5 

.55008 i 33.7 

55305 1 33.4 

55308 1 33.1 

55605 ' 33.3 

55607 ; 34.5 

5.5608 33.5 

57007 33.6 

57406 33.7 

57408 35.0 

58805 : 35.1 

60505 35. 

69305 i 34.3 

72405 35.5 

72708 33.2 

73308 34.7 

85206 34.2 

88605 34.5 

91305 34.5 

92208 3.5.3 

92406 34.5 

92409 35.0 

92905 35.2 

92909 33.1 

95509 34.5 



3.1454 
1.4864 
1.8242 
1.8276 

14. 4630 
4. 1281 
6. 1962 
5.0200 

21.. 5399 
1.4S92 
1.2499 
9. 4585 
1.2716 

15. .5835 

17.4226 
2. 5160 
9. 5078 

10.9180 
2. 3931 

22. .5848 
3.3176 
2. 4923 

12.2004 

23. 1471 

. ,59.52 

2.0430 

8.4415 

9.0386 

14. 2986 
4.9315 
1.6362 
3.0940 
6. 6206 
8. 2366 
5.7131 
2.7000 

10. 1363 
2.9475 



Average. 34. 1 



7. 2530 



0. 7863 
.4955 
.4560 
.6092 
.7232 
.6881 
.7745 
.6275 
.6731 
.7446 
.6249 
.5.564 
.6358 
.6233 
.6222 
.5032 
.7923 
.7279 
. ,5983 
.9034 
. 6635 
. 6231 
.7177 
.7014 
.5952 
.6810 

1.4069 
.7532 
.7944 
.4483 
.8181 
.7735 
.6621 
.7488 
.6348 
.5400 
.6335 
.7369 



0.02279 
.01443 
.01393 
.01792 
.02111 
.01994 
.02213 



.02089 
.02251 
.01866 
.01701 
.01898 
.01804 
.01846 
.01.507 
.02395 
.02184 
.01734 
.02699 
. 01975 
.01846 
.02047 
.01999 
.01701 
.01984 
.03963 
.02270 
.02291 
.01312 
.02731 
.02242 
.01876 
. 02168 
. 01814 
. 01534 
.01916 
.02136 



.02023 



73.9 



SIZE OF HEAD, 36 KERNELS AND OVER. 



18906 


65.0 


0.9229 


0.9229 


0. 01420 


67 


5 


21813 


43.2 


4.0258 


.8051 


. 01877 


80 


21 


34206 


40.5 


1.5940 


.7970 


.01968 


74 


5 


37707 


38.6 


3.3004 


.6601 


.01710 


64 


5 


40205 


38.8 


3. 6302 


.7260 


.01871 


65 


11 


40505 


42.5 


4. 1.546 


1.0386 


.02444 


60 


"4 


43405 


41.3 


2.8000 


.9333 


.02258 


64 


3 


46105 


37.1 


4.6146 


.6592 


.01775 


73 


8 


48705 


44.0 


4.3615 


.7269 


. 01652 


80 


7 


48706 


47.4 


6. 1986 


.7748 


.01635 


78 


12 


.55508 


36.0 


3. 7407 


.6222 


.01732 


73 


12 


.57405 


41.0 


.8328 


.8328 


.02031 


73 


1 


57805 


38.6 


4.8988 


.6998 


.01814 


76 


17 


57905 


36.8 


2.4731 


.4122 


.01118 


74 


17 


58705 


58.7 


2..M36 


.6359 


.01082 


68 


11 


58905 


42.5 
38.2 


2.3031 

7. 1828 


.5758 
.7183 


.01355 
.01880 


66 

77 


13 
30 


59605 


62805 


37.0 


1.34.51 


.4484 


.01212 


70 


14 


66006 


52.3 


6.0090 


.8584 


.01642 


73 


12 


72806 


36.7 
37.6 


2.0970 
8. .5373 


.6990 
.7761 


. 01906 
. 02062 


62 

78 


5 
20 


73306 


81.505 


48.7 


2.8327 


.9442 


.01940 


78 


7 


84905 


37.0 


.7130 


.7130 


.01927 


47 


4 


9X106 


36.2. 


2.8816 


..5763 


.01592 


75 


7 


95505 

Average. 


37.0 


.3146 


.3146 


.00850 


79 


3 


42.1 


3.3723 


.7148 


.01710 


71.0 


10.2 



118 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 36. — Summary of relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant. 



Classification according to 
number of kernels on 
head. 


Average 

Number ! number 

:of plants, of kernels 

on spike. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Yield per 
head 

(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
• (gram) 


Height 
(cm. ) . 


Tillering. 


Below 16 


! 18 ! 13.3 
36 ; 18.4 
80 1 22.2 
84 ] 25.9 
73 30. 1 
38 34. 1 
25 42. 1 


1.3169 
3. 7758 
6. 8466 
7. 5207 
7.4992 
7. 2530 
3.3723 


0. 2654 
.3383 
.4355 
.4848 
..5598 
.6868 
.7148 


0. 02059 
.01862 
.01953 
.01874 
. 01958 
.02023 
.01710 


55.2 
64.1 
73.8 
73.8 
74.5 
73.9 
71.0 


6.9 


16 to 20 


13.7 


20 to 24 


21.4 


24 to 28 


21.2 


28 to 32 

32 to 36 . 


19.4 
15.4 




10.2 







TabLe 37. — Relation of yield of plant to height and tillering, and to the yield per head. 



Classification according to yield per plant, in 
grams. 


Number 
of plants. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Height 
(cm.). 


Tillering. 


Yield per 
head 

(gram). 




31 
67 
87 
93 
51 
20 
5 


0.6050 
1.7673 
3. 5526 
7.6485 
12. 2862 
17. 1908 
23. 2829 


56.5 
62.2 
69.1 
75.4 
84.4 
84.6 
85.2 


3.7 
7.0 
11.6 
22.1 
32.3 
42.9 
43.2 


0. 3553 


1 to 2 5 


.4740 


2 5 to 5 


.4917 


5 to 10 


.5320 


10 to 15 


..5592 


15 to 20 


.5310 


More than 20 


.6865 







Table SS.-- -Relation of yield per head to yield, height, and tillering of plant, and to weight of 

average Icernel. 



Classification according to yield 
per head, in grams. 


Number 
of plants. 

■ 


Yield per 

head 
(gram). 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Height 
(cm.). 


Tillering. 


AV eight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


Below 300 


30 
62 
98 
78 
50 
25 
12 


0.2484 
.3567 
.4524 
.5477 
.6372 
. 7456 
.9229 


1.6939 
3. 7365 
6. 7326 
9. 5646 
7. 6214 
4. 4523 
5. 7687 


60.8 
65.6 
72.8 
76.6 
74.3 
75.2 
73.7 


11.4 
15.5 
19.9 
21.8 
17.3 
18.6 
10.3 


0. 01586 


.300 to 400 


.01737 


400 to 500 


.01847 


.500 to 600 


. 02073 


0.600 to 0.700 

700 to 800 


. 020.56 
.02179 


More than 800 


.02151 







SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. 

As between wheat kernels of the same variet}^ raised under similar 
conditions, those kernels having a high percentage of proteid mate- 
rial have a lower specific gravity, weigh slightly less, and occupy a 
smaller volume than kernels having a smaller percentage of proteids. 

As between individual spikes and individual plants, the same rela- 
tions obtain. 

As between individual plants in different years, these relations do 
not hold. 

The quality of high proteid content and its correlated properties 
may be due to immaturity in the kernel, or they may belong to the 
normal and fully ripened kernel. 

As between kernels, spikes, and plants, those kernels of greater 
weight contain a larger weight of proteids — this in spite of the fact 
that they contain a lower percentage. 



SUMMAKY AND CONCLUSIONS. 119 

Plants bearing the largest number of kernels have kernels of more 
than medium but not the greatest weight; as do also plants producing 
the greatest weight of kernels. The same is true of plants producing 
the greatest weight of proteid matter and gluten. 

Heav}' seed wheat drilled at the rate of H bushels per acre pro- 
duced a much larger crop of seed the first year of the separation than 
did light seed drilled at the same rate, but by continuing the separa- 
tion of the respective crops and selecting heav}" seed from the crop 
grown from heavy seed, and light seed from the crop grown from 
light seed, the difference in yield in three or four years was small. 

After the first year of separation the light seed produced a greater 
amount of proteids per acre than did the heavy seed. 

A determination of the total or of the proteid nitrogen content in 
the kernels on one row of spikelets of wheat aft'ords a fairly close esti- 
mate of the same constituents in the kernels on the other row of 
spikelets. 

A determination of the total or of the proteid nitrogen content in 
the kernels on one-half of the spikes on a wheat plant will give a very 
good estimate of the same constituents in the kernels on the other 
spikes, provided there are at least an average number of spikes on the 
plant. 

There may be quite a large variation in the proteid nitrogen con- 
tent of different spikes on the same wheat plant. 

Determinations of the proteid nitrogen content of 800 spikes of 
wheat of the same variety representing different plants showed a 
variation of from 1.12 to 4.95 per cent of proteid nitrogen, and 351 
plants of the same variety the following year varied from 1.20 to 5.85 
per cent. 

The proportion of gluten to proteids in kernels of different wheat 
plants may var^^ considerably. A determination of proteid nitrogen 
is therefore not always a guide to the gluten content of the wheat. 
Selection for improvement should be based on the determination of 
gluten. 

Wheat plants having kernels high in gluten contain a smaller pro- 
portion of other proteids than do plants of medium or low gluten 
content. 

In wheat of the same variety, raised in the saine field in the same 
year, the ratio of gliadin to glutenin was practically the same in 
plants of low, medium, and high proteid nitrogen content. 

It may therefore be assumed that an increase in the gluten con- 
tent of a given variety of wheat raised in the same region would carry 
with it a corresponding improvement in its value for bread making, 
although there might be fluctuations from year to y€i,ar in the quality 
of the gluten. 



120 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

The content of proteid nitrogen, the kernel weight, and the total 
proteid nitrogen production by the wheat plant are hereditary quali- 
ties. 

There is a tendency for plants possessing any of these qualities in 
an extreme degree to produce progeny in which the same qualities 
approach more closely to the average, but certain exceptional plants 
may transmit the same or more extreme qualities. 

The yield of grain per plant after a severe winter was decreased in 
proportion to the susceptibility of the plant to cold. The effect of 
the cold caused the plant to produce a less number of heads, or, in 
other words, to tiller less. 

The early-maturing plants yielded the most grain, and those ripen- 
ing later produced in each case less when grouped into ripening 
periods of four days, extending through more than three weeks' time. 

The early-maturing plants produced grain of slightly lower nitro- 
gen content than the later maturing plants, and the number of grams 
of proteid nitrogen in the average kernel was likewise less in the 
early-maturing plants . 

Plants with heads of slightly more than medium size produced 
the largest yields of grain, and were taller than plants with either 
larger or smaller heads. Plants with heads of medium size, or slightly 
less, tillered most extensively. 

The weight of the average kernel did not increase with the size of 
the head, nor did it decrease, except on the very largest heads. 

The largest yielding plants were the tallest and tillered most. 



o 



LB Ap '09 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY 
OF WHEAT 



BY 



T. L LYON 



Thesis presented to the University Faculty of Gomel! University 
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 



1904 



